A daily compilation of significant news articles and comment
August 3, 2007
3. Watersheds
Column: Polluting on the honor system?
By Michael Fitzgerld, columnist
Perhaps it is time to question the Agricultural Waiver, the exception to
New data shows farms are poisoning
These pollutants are not doing our groundwater any good, either.
A state report on the ag waiver reckons that a staggering 9,493 miles of rivers and streams and 513,130 acres of lakes and reservoirs are "impaired" by irrigated agriculture.
Tragically, "It wasn't on our radar," said Liz Kanter, a spokeswoman for the California Water Resources Control Board.
In fact, irrigation water draining off fields into waterways was not monitored at all until recently, when the state required farmers to keep track of it themselves.
Now, "They have to prepare water quality plans," Kanter said. "They have to submit them to us. They have to perform group monitoring. Do courses in water quality management. They have to submit a notice of intent."
That sounds like a substantial improvement - and it is - but the question remains whether it is sufficient to protect the Delta's ailing fisheries and the public health.
The answer to that lies in the details of the current system, in which farmers form "coalitions" that monitor polluted water as it drains from fields to waterways and report data to the state.
Besides spotty monitoring, these coalitions shield the individual identity of polluters, exact discharge locations, volumes, concentrations and other data essential to accountability and enforcement, critics say.
Even Kanter conceded the system has holes in it.
"We don't have full compliance, but it's getting better," she said, adding, "It's like any program you start when people aren't necessarily on board. There was resistance."
In other words, many farmers hate pollution discharge regulations and refuse to abide by them.
But there's no other way, said Kenneth Landau, assistant executive officer of the Central Valley Water Quality Control Board, the regional board that regulates the Valley.
Asking every single farmer to identify his pollutants, monitor them, devise management plans and other technical tasks too is much for the lone farmer, Landau said.
It would overburden regulators, too. "If we were dealing with each and every farmer individually, we would need many, many, many more staff than I have now," Landau said.
Hence coalitions. Unfortunately, regulators cannot fine or imprison coalitions. But they can decertify them, requiring lone farmers to comply, then fine violators, Landau said.
Number of violators fined to date: zero.
"But we're getting darned close," Landau affirmed.
Bill Jennings, head of the California Sport Fishing Protection Alliance, believes farming should be regulated under a general order by regional boards just like every other industry.
"I would point out that we're certainly - under a general order - able to regulate every mom and pop business. I don't believe a farmer is any less intelligent than a junkyard operator or a welder."
A general order is sufficient and requires no more staff than a waiver would,
He believes the ag waiver actually serves to shield farmers from the law rather than to protect our waterways from gross polluters.
He has taken state regulators to court.
"Certainly ag has been treated very differently than virtually every other segment of society," observed
Water officials apparently hope the new rules will accustom farmers to responsible discharge management after years of unregulated operations. Perhaps state politics permit no other solution.
Still, the whole idea of self-regulation calls to mind the Founding Father who said, "If men were angels, no government were necessary." #
http://www.recordnet.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20070803/A_NEWS0803/708030321
####
No comments:
Post a Comment