“I’m really concerned about the
Neuse River Estuary,” my daughter Sarah announced one evening. “At school
today, Norah, Ari, Sienna, and I talked about water pollution and decided that
we should do what we can to save the Neuse.”
“Good for you, Sarah,” I said
approvingly. “The only difficulty is that we live in Durham and the water
quality problems are near the coast, over 100 miles away.”
“Wait a second, Dad. Doesn’t water
run downhill?”
“Sure,” I responded, “so what?”
“Well, you once told me that we
should be careful with fertilizer and stuff because the pollution from Durham
runs into Falls Lake. So, the water that flows out of Falls Lake goes into the
Neuse River which, like, carries it to the coast causing algae and dead fish.”
“Okay, it’s basically true that a
portion of Durham’s treated wastewater and stormwater runoff ends up in Falls
Reservoir, so we do have an impact on Falls Lake.” I agreed. “But, it’s not
clear that anything you do in Durham matters very much if you’re concerned
about the lower Neuse River and Estuary.”
“Well, does it or doesn’t it?”
Sarah demanded. “You’re a water resources professor at Duke University, you
should know. Does it matter how much pollution comes from Durham? And what
about the people in Raleigh - don’t they pollute the lower Neuse either? What’s
the answer?”
“Its not that simple,” I pointed
out. “We’re not real certain about the degree of impact from various sources
and locations in the Neuse watershed.”
“You’re kidding! You mean to tell
me that a Neuse River management plan is being implemented and you don’t really
know that it’s going to work?”
“Well, yes and no. We expect water
quality to be better in certain regions of the lower Neuse, but the change may
not completely satisfy the public’s desire for improvements. It seems likely
that refinements to the plan will be necessary.”
Sarah’s dissatisfaction with this
response was evident on her face. “How can you approve a plan when you don’t
know what it will do?” she asked.
“First of all, I’m a scientist. I
don’t approve plans, only elected officials have that right. Second, you’ve got
to realize that we always have a plan in operation. We have a plan for the
Neuse right now; it just isn’t as stringent as some people might prefer.”
“Okay, that makes sense, but I
still want to know about people in Durham and Raleigh - does their pollution
affect the lower Neuse?”
“Sarah, that’s a good question.
For the Neuse River watershed as well as other large watersheds in the United
States, one of the more pressing research priorities is the need to understand
pollutant transport and transformation on a watershed scale so that accurate
predictions can be made to guide management. Many water pollutants, such as
nutrients, synthetic organics, and pathogenic microorganisms may enter a
waterbody ten miles to over one hundred miles upstream of a point of concern
for possible adverse impact. While it is reasonable to assume that there is
some attenuation of these pollutants with distance, the degree of loss or
change is currently quite uncertain. The interesting and challenging research
task is to develop scientific understanding leading to good predictive models,
which are essential for effective and equitable basinwide water quality
management.”
“Dad, I’m not one of your
students.” Sarah groaned. “Stop
lecturing and tell me what we can do in Durham!”
“Alright, Sarah, it’s reasonable
to assume that Durham has some impact on the lower Neuse, even if we can’t
quantify it too precisely right now. So, you and your friends might consider a
few things that can make a difference, if not in the Neuse, certainly in our
nearby Durham streams and in Falls Reservoir.
“One of the most important water
pollution factors in residential and urban areas is the stormwater drainage
network. Our house is not located near any streams or waterbodies, which at
first thought, suggests that we have nothing to be concerned about. However,
the storm drains located in the street in front of our house and throughout
Durham provide an efficient pathway for fertilizers, lawn chemicals, and
general urban debris to be washed from the streets and parking lots directly
into our streams.
“This means that in areas with
storm drains, location can be a deceiving indicator of impact. Potentially
polluting land uses that are located quite remote from a stream or lake may
have an impact on surface water quality, because a storm drain efficiently
channels the stormwater runoff into the waterbody. So, Sarah, you and your
friends can have a positive impact on water quality by urging your classmates
and their families to keep polluting substances from washing into storm
drains.”
“Thanks, Dad.” Sarah responded, as
she dashed off to answer yet another phone call.
I think this post highlights the difficulty the general public and elected officials face with plans to clean up our rivers. We are lacking concrete answers to how proposed plans will reduce water pollution. Your responses to your daughter almost contradict what the public education about watersheds and how polluting actions that happened remotely can negatively impact a river or bay. I feel your response to your daughter almost discredits the idea of TMDL as a tool for water pollution reduction. Are TMDL plans invalid?
ReplyDeleteNo, TMDL plans are not invalid. I chaired the 2001 National Academy of Sciences review of the TMDL program. One of the topics we stressed in that report was the uncertainty in the predictions of water quality models for TMDLs. In this blog post I point out the uncertainty in our scientific knowledge (and in our predictive models), but that uncertainty does not mean that there is no downstream impact nor does it mean that actions should not be taken since there is scientific uncertainty. Several of my previous blog posts address these issues.
ReplyDelete