The state of Florida is one of the most attractive places in the world. People from across the world have come to retire here and to play tourist. One of the state's major selling points is the closeness and accessibility to water. Florida's, springs, rivers, and lakes provide a natural source of entertainment. However, water has become a major issue in Florida -- drinking water, to be precise. Due to Florida's exploding population, its aquifers and wellfields are being consumed faster than the natural rate of replenishment. Groundwater, which collects in aquifers (porous underground rock), is not just used for drinking; agriculture and recreation are also large uses of Florida's groundwater. Some locations in the state are fighting to keep their own groundwater resources from being depleted.
Development was viewed in 1950s America as a good thing; growth and development of this great land of ours was necessary and important to the economic and political welfare of the country. And so we began building, and we really haven't stopped since then. The theory of conservation claims that maybe we have now done too much developing, and that we should stop or slow down, and maybe even tear down some part of our development efforts, because we have lost tremendous amounts of wildlife and biodiversity in our quest for the almighty dollar.
These two topics -- Florida water, and development vs. conservation -- have come to a head in Tampa Bay, a very visible part of the Sunshine State. Two of the cities of the New South, Tampa and St. Petersburg, are large, thriving cities that urban dwellers could easily feel comfortable in. The entire Tampa Bay metropolitan area, running from Hudson to Punta Gorda, is home to millions of people. And every one of them needs water to survive.
The earth has an enormous, yet fixed, supply of water -- in the forms of ice, water vapor, and the popular liquid form. But only three percent of the world's water is freshwater,which is what humans need to consume for survival. Even worse, all but 0.003% of all water, fresh or not, is too polluted for human consumption. But that still amounts to about two million gallons per person on this planet. The water runs through the natural hydrologic cycle, as long as we do not use water faster than it can be replenished.
When the cities and farms of Florida get thirsty, the natural resources of Florida suffer. Getting more water to water-stressed areas is becoming more and more of a dilemma, and many solutions are offered: build desalination plants. Or reuse more water. Or we can just stop people moving into our beautiful state. However, to some the answer is actually quite simple and obvious: pipe water in from a water-rich area to a water-poor one. However, the impact of this potential solution is, unfortunately, not so obvious -- it would damage the environment. The resource would not be protected. The natural wealth of Florida has slowly deteriorated by the hands of the people, and the abuse has gone primarily without attention until someone cries for media coverage, always with a clear message: do something!
Extracting water from one site -- an aquifer, a lake or a river -- and moving it to another site can have a distinct impact on the immediate environment. Pumping excessive amounts of water from aquifers hurts the sustainability of nearby wetlands and lakes, and diminishes the quantity and quality of water from private wells. In Tampa Bay, pumping from wellfields in the West Coast Regional Water Supply Authority system has damaged wetlands and surface water bodies on a significant and noticeable basis. The process of skimming water from a surface water body must be done such that the delicate estuaries that are downstream are taken into account. The estuaries of Charlotte Harbor, Tampa Bay and Kings Bay simply would not survive if too much water was diverted from them. Without (these) estuaries, fish and wildlife are diminished. Furthermore, the destructive environmental consequences of pipelines also must be considered. Wetlands, marshes, rivers and lakes, not to mention communities of all sizes, would be environmentally affected by hundreds of miles of pipe.
Aquifers do have a lot of water, but when water is extracted for human consumption, the level drops. It's just like drinking water with ice cubes through a straw. As you get more water,the level of the water drops, exposing the ice. In this case, the aquifer's water is mined over time until either the water is all gone (leaving dried-up lakes and wetlands exposed, leading to environmental damage [like saltwater intrusion]), or the marginal cost of getting more water becomes economically forbidding. An efficient method of allocating scarce water is needed, which should understand that a marginal user cost is tied to groundwater extraction, showing the opportunity cost identified with the lack of water in the future (which is being used in the present day). Given a constant demand over constant time, an efficient model would consist of slow water decrease, and the marginal cost of pumping the water out to the public increases as the water level decreases. In perfect markets, the price of water would increase over time (demand rises) until the supply is gone, at which point the marginal cost of extracting the water is the same as the price of water.
The Southwest Florida Water Management District must satisfy the water needs of the people, and it must ensure a sustainable yield in a region where the demand for limited groundwater supplies is a remarkably high proportion. Approximately half of the Southwest Florida Water Management District has been designated as part of various Water Use Caution Areas: the largest one spans eight counties. Water withdrawals have already exceeded what can safely be taken from the aquifer system.
Environmentalists favor a plan that would ultimately keep the pristine nature of these beautiful resources just that -- pristine and beautiful. In the real world, this translates to comprehensive plans that include estimated water availability and estimated water use for the immediate future.
Al Gore, in his book "Earth in the Balance", calls for a deeper understanding of what we now call "development." Many people have recognized the fact that a more unified (economic) world can be achieved in part by bringing some of the riches and resources of richer groups to that of poorer ones, to achieve at least a temporary balance or equality. It helps to make the move from poor to sustainable a bit quicker. However, the environment is usually put at risk when these large growth projects are jump-started into motion, because the speed and intensity of these programs can be detrimental to the immediate natural world. Usually, this scenario applies to rich and poor nations, and usually works through developmental organizations like the World Bank, but it can be used for the Tampa Bay water crisis. Money can't buy everything, especially when Mother Nature doesn't use any currency at all to operate. Unless industry gets a better idea of how it can effectively give aid to conservation efforts and how it can understand what kind and how much development is appropriate, more crises like this one will occur. Earth-based concerns must be a part of the criteria for funding development projects in the future.
The Bruntland Commission, established by the United Nations to examine and take advantage of the seemingly natural connection between economic thought and environmental conservation, claimed that the people of this (or any) generation must keep in mind that their actions will necessarily impact the next generation. Today that phrase permeates every paragraph of pro-planet propaganda, but just because it is rhetoric does not (or should not) lessen the importance that it tries to communicate to the people of the world. It isn't yet indicative in the manner in which our modern economic structure gauges the result of decisions made in the "real world" (instead of economic models), and so we assume that it is okay to use all the natural resources that we like.
The main goal of sustainable development, a phrase coined by the Bruntland Commission, is to develop consumption systems that regenerate themselves indefinitely without degrading the ecosystem in the process -- another natural form of perpetual motion (besides the concept of life on earth), if you will. For it to succeed, the earth's resources (public goods) must be viewed as assets and not "free" goods. It implies that we must rethink our way of life and standards of living to produce income and not accumulate assets from Mother Nature. Proponents of sustainable development believe that current methods of production and consumption leave the next generation with relatively less than what we have now, because it encourages wasteful practices and lifestyles, which limits what people of the future might get. Sustainable development stresses resource conservation and preserving ecosystem quality over the long run -- both of which happen to be outcomes of proper (integrated solid) waste management.
Pinellas County, home to almost a million people, has no drinking water below it. The citizens depend on other places in Florida to provide their drinking water. The Southwest Florida Water Management District is trying to establish groundwater levels at a point that will keep lakes and wetlands from running dry. And once aquifers run dry, it cannot be realistically recharged. Pinellas County may have to quit taking so much water out of the aquifer, but it claims that all the water used from the aquifer is replaced every year. However, evidence exists of a long-term downward trend in the groundwater levels. Pinellas County is taking more water than is being replenished. And as the groundwater level drops over time, the lakes and wetlands are drained.
Levels drop in the Floridian Aquifer when Pinellas County officials begin pulling water from it. Pinellas County cannot continue to just take and take, leaving dry lakes and wetlands on the surface. Pinellas County claims that it would take over twenty-five years to lower the water levels by ten feet, which is enough to devastate the surface environment (including lakes, streams and wetlands). This is the exact scenario in areas around the wellfields.
The Southwest Florida Water Management District is home to Pinellas, Hernando, Pasco, and Hillsborough Counties. Pinellas County has been pumping millions of gallons of water from Pasco County wellfields. Hillsborough County, on one side of the war, feels that this has shrunk their lakes, damaged their property, and has caused their wellfields to be overpumped. They also feel that Pinellas County needs to do something to repair the damage, and is trying to sue Pinellas County. The other side of the war features Pinellas County, the city of St. Petersburg, and the West Coast Regional Water Supply Authority, who claim that the environmental damage has been caused by a lack of rainfall.
Florida's water policy has created fierce arguments between the counties, and there is little chance that the water policy will change. Probably the biggest advocates for a new water policy are residents of Hillsborough County and Pasco County, who claim that their wetlands and lakes are dry. Environmentalists, the government and regulators want a plan to make cities take into account how much water is available when considering growth plans; cities will have to put limits on their growth such that they can grow only within their means. Pressure from large-scale farms, utilities, developers and local governments who did not want limits on their water supply may mean the legislative session will allow this fierce debate over water with the state's most densely populated county ahead. Agricultural interests wanted to ensure that farmers could get more water if they needed to expand, so they drafted measures favoring those who already had water for permit renewal over new people who want water.
A number of state legislators would like to create and lock in the "right" of those now holding water-use permits to automatic renewals, and presumably late sale, which is how arid western states ration water. The water rights were guaranteed a very long time ago, for those who arrived first, and told the next arrivals to buy what they could. This is why Los Angeles buys water rights from Colorado. For Florida's major city residents, this would be an expensive change. It would ruin the Everglades, because water brokers put no value on preserving the environment. The pressure for change was obvious in the Florida House's Select Committee on Water Policy, and much of the pressure comes from this 30-year-old water war on Florida's west coast. The Southwest Florida Water Management District has issued permits to use more water than is available, and the Southwest Florida Water Management District has also agreed that those who hold water permits may sell them. Many members of the committee have only a muddled understanding of Florida water law, how it is administered, and the importance of implementing provisions requiring the districts to establish "minimum flows and levels," which is a scientific calculation that establishes how much water can be withdrawn from a lake, river, or aquifer without permanent harm. It is an essential planning tool, and it should be the basis of issuance of water use permits.
Committee members were treating the calculations more as economic or political in nature than scientific or environmental. Six amendments were proposed to balance the calculation with the need or economic benefit of continuing to pump or withdraw water regardless of the impact on the water source. The place to balance economic interests is not in calculating the limits of the water resource, but when issuing permits to use that resource. The public, as well as its water managers, must have a complete understanding of the limitsof current water resources. Strong incentives to preserve, conserve, and increase fresh water supply should be in place. Land use and water planning must be connected, and good arguments can be made for strengthening control over the districts.
This water shortage problem affects citizens the most. A resident of Pasco County spoke to a Florida Senate committee that was interested in finding ways to solve the water shortage problem; she painted a grim picture of neighborhoods turned into graveyards of fallen trees, sinkholes, burned out wetlands and dried up lakes. In Pasco County, lakes bottomed out, wellfields dried up, wetlands burned and wildlife died. Residents of Pinellas County and the city of St. Petersburg get their drinking water from wellfields in Pasco County under arrangements made decades ago, when pastureland dominated the county. Because of strained wellfields, the Southwest Florida Water Management District has restricted water withdrawal to 116 million gallons per day, which applies only to the public water supply (not to agriculture or industry), raising concerns about the equity of the situation. In the past, during cycles of critical low rainfall, the Southwest Florida Water Management District curbed lawn sprinkling and unnecessary water use in parts of the Southwest Florida Water Management District along the Gulf Coast.
Pinellas County wants to remain utilizing traditional water supplies (such as rainfall and underground well pumping), but these actions are causing environmental damage to the aquifer. Pinellas has been accused of pumping more water than the amount replaced. Pinellas County blames this on a five-year rainfall deficit. However, according to district scientists, environmental conditions in and around the water wellfields have not substantially improved -- despite above-normal rainfall for the past two years. The Southwest Florida Water Management District asked Pinellas County to validate its claim of a five-year rainfall deficit. The lawyers representing Pinellas County refused to do so, because they believe they are exempt from public record state law. Now, Pinellas County wants a scientific peer review by outside experts, which is what the Southwest Florida Water Management District and Hillsborough County has wanted all along.
Alternative policies exist for this situation; non-traditional water supplies should be explored and developed, as dictated by state law. Some of these supplies include desalinated water (which Hillsborough County and Pasco County already do), treated waste water, continued conservation, and/or increased reclaimed water use. If these policies are followed, then there will be a reduction of wellfield pumping (which will relieve environmental stress), a nearly perfect water supply (safe, sustainable, environmentally-sensitive, drought-proof and cost-effective), a lack of reliance on rainfall, and (more) desalinated water, the best quality water in the world (according to the United States Environmental Protection Agency).