|
Manuals
and Guides: Environment
Protecting
Your Groundwater
Educating
for Action
Reprinted
with permission from the League of Women Voters Education Fund.
Copyright © 1994. Order from the League of Women Voters of
the United States, 1730 M Street, NW, Washington, DC 20036, 202-429-1965.
Pub. #980: $6.95 ($5.95 for members) plus shipping and handling.
Quantity prices upon request.
Manual Index
Acknowledgments
Introduction
Chapter 1: Getting Started
Chapter 2: Researching and Developing
information
Chapter 3: Development and Distribution
of Materials
Chapter 4: Public Meetings,
Forums and Workshops
Chapter
5: Publicity
Chapter 6: Fundraising
Chapter 7: Keeping It Going
Case
Study 1: Well Survey Builds Commitment to Groundwater
Case Study 2: "Training the Trainers" Keeps Protection Efforts
Moving
Case Study 3: Video Illuminates Major Groundwater
Issues in County
Case Study 4: Building
Coalitions Across County Lines
Appendix A: League Community
Groundwater Education Projects
Appendix B: Sources of
Groundwater Contamination
Appendix C: Data Collection
Form: General Roles/Duties/Authorities
Appendix D: Data Collection
Form: Local/State/Federal Management Status
Appendix E: Resources
Contents
Case
Study 1: Well Survey Builds Commitment to Groundwater
Case Study 2: "Training the Trainers" Keeps Protection Efforts
Moving
Case Study 3: Video Illuminates Major Groundwater
Issues in County
Case Study 4: Building
Coalitions Across County Lines
Case
Study 1
Well Survey
Builds Commitment to Groundwater in Enid, Oklahoma Enid with a
population of 50,000, is the largest user of groundwater in Oklahoma,
relying on entirely groundwater for its drinking water. The city's
153 public water wells lie primarily outside the city limits,
on private farm land, with some located up to 30 miles from the
city. The city's two aquifers are shallow and sandy, with the
water table only 20 feet below the surface in some areas. All
of the principle local economic activities—agriculture and
oil and gas production—threaten groundwater. Although city
officials are well aware of the threats to the ground water supply
and had formulated a wellhead protection plan, a financial crunch
threatened implementation efforts. The city happily accepted the
League's offer to conduct public education, a major component
of the city's groundwater plan. Throughout the project, the League
worked with city staff to determine how best to supplement the
city's plan.
Principal
Issues
Enid's lack
of direct control over its five well fields, which lie primarily
on private land, is a major concern. The project sought to establish
information on the current status of the town s well fields, and
to determine the level of water awareness of area residents. The
League targeted three main audiences—the petroleum industry,
agricultural producers and Enid city water users—with the
goal of educating them about how their activities could impact
water quality.
Well
Survey
The League
recruited and trained "water watchers" to survey wells on one
of Enid's five well fields. (The city had an EPA demonstration
project grant to survey one of its other well fields.) Anticipating
that recruiting volunteers would be a challenge, organizers sought
to design a project that would offer volunteers meaningful involvement,
the opportunity to have an impact on their community, and specialized
training.
The League
hired an artist to design a colorful, symbolic logo for use on
all project materials. Project leaders recruited an authority
on groundwater from Oklahoma State University to present a slide
show and lecture as training for the volunteers. Newspaper stories,
advertisements and public service announcements (PSAs) brought
52 people to the first training session, and 20 were recruited
as "water watchers." Project organizers designed a well survey
form, and at a second training session, water watchers were instructed
on using the forms and were assigned wells to survey. Each water
watcher received a packet containing a map of the well clearly
marked, an instruction sheet, a survey form and a plot of the
well area to complete by drawing in the features of interest—such
as other wells, homesites, utilities, trash piles, etc. All of
the water watchers completed and returned their surveys.
The water
watchers found expected things such as oil and gas wells, railroad
tracks and cattle—and unexpected things such as a dead cow
near a well house, well houses in poor condition or not secured,
and farmers using the well's electrical supply for other purposes.
Numerous septic fields were mapped, as well as fuel tanks, dilapidated
structures, abandoned homesites and an old cistern. One long-time
resident remembered and marked the location of an abandoned cemetery.
In most cases the wells were in good condition and adequately
protected; the exceptions were noted and reported.
The city
has taken remedial actions to repair some well houses, renegotiate
contracts with farmers to keep cattle from being fed and watered
near wells, and remove trash near wells. The well survey represented
many volunteer hours and many dollars saved by the city. And all
of the water watchers became advocates for clean water in their
community.
Other
Activities
The League
also conducted a survey to determine the level of water knowledge
in Enid. Three hundred surveys were completed, indicating that
although there was considerable concern about water quality in
the community, many people did not know where their water came
from, who provided it, or what an aquifer is.
When a search
for educational materials on the impacts of gas and oil production
and agriculture on groundwater proved fruitless, the League produced
its own brochures. The project's brochures on petroleum and agriculture
have since been reprinted by the Oklahoma Department of Health
for distribution statewide.
The League
also purchased a groundwater flow model to use in presentations
at civic clubs and schools, and to display at the county library.
To facilitate training and to ensure the model's continued use,
the League produced a 15-minute video tape on how to do a groundwater
model demonstration. The tape is available for $15 to organizations
interested in purchasing or using a model (see Resources
section). The League makes its groundwater model available to
the public for demonstration or display, upon request.
Spin-Offs
When a new
oil deposit was recently discovered in the area, one of the water
watchers appeared before the city council to protest the proposed
use of a salt water injection well. (Injection wells are commonly
used in oil production to reinject into the ground brines that
are a waste byproduct of the production process. Careless injection
of such wastes can contaminate groundwater supplies.) In response
to her testimony, the council strengthened agreements with the
oil producer to require a special casing and other safeguards
for the well. Achieving such concessions from an oil producer
is a major change in the region.
Back
to top
Case
Study 2
"Training the Trainers" Keeps Protection Efforts Moving Forward
Throughout
Washington state, increased urbanization and the use of agricultural
chemicals are the principle threats to groundwater. The state's
1991 Growth Management Act requires counties to identify critical
aquifer recharge areas and set up management plans for contamination
sources. Thurston County, Washington is one of the fastest growing
counties in the U.S., with its population (162,000 in 1990) expected
to double by the year 2000. The county's aquifers, composed of
poorly sorted sand and gravel overlain by glacial rock and soil,
have been identified as "extremely susceptible" to contamination.
The LWV of Washington, working close with the LWV of Thurston
County, chose Thurston County as the primary focus of its project.
Principal
Issues
In 1991,
Thurston County had drafted and was attempting to adopt a groundwater
protection strategy for the northern part of the county, and was
embarking on a wellhead protection program. Public understanding
of the issues was critical, since the county's aquifer protection
plan, which would include a special household tax, was to be submitted
to voters for approval.
Train-the-Trainers
The project's
first step was to produce and distribute 2,500 copies of a manual
for volunteers to teach others the importance of protecting groundwater.
Speaking of ground Water (Figure 6—not shown on-line) discusses
why clean groundwater is essential, how to recognize possible
contaminants, how to prevent contamination and where to go for
help. The manuals were distributed to every League member in the
state, at the League's public forums, and to various government
offices and individuals requesting copies. League members across
the state were encouraged to talk with local governments about
groundwater protection. A useful, readable booklet, Speaking of
Ground Water has received high praise from the public and professionals
in the field and will continue to be a valuable teaching tool.
In November
1991 the League held a two-day training seminar with assistance
from the Department of Health, the Thurston County Office of Water
Quality and the state Department of Ecology. This "crash course"
was designed to mobilize citizens to go out into the community
to discuss the importance of groundwater protection and to train
participants to identify potential pollution sources. Twenty-seven
people attended. League members attending from other areas around
the state were able to take the training to their local areas.
Public
Forum
A group of
volunteers from the LWV of Thurston County, trained at the November
seminar, planned and held a public forum to alert citizens to
groundwater issues and to bring elected officials and the public
together. A front-page article in the Olympia newspaper announced
the upcoming forum, attracting more than 70 residents. At the
forum, three city council members (one from each of the three
cities that must ratify the county's groundwater plan) and one
county commissioner presented their views on the proposed management
plan and what it would take to implement it. Inviting public officials
to participate in the forum ensured that the officials actually
read Speaking of Ground Water and made an effort to talk with
citizens.
Spin-Offs
In Thurston
County, local League members trained in groundwater issues continued
working with local governments to assist in building support for
groundwater protection after the project ended. One member, for
example, helped plan and conduct a tour of Thurston's water supply,
McAllister Springs. Others held small neighborhood meetings to
gather support for the county's groundwater protection plan.
The North
Thurston County Groundwater Management Plan was adopted by the
legislative bodies of all four jurisdictions in July 1992. A funding
and financing package to implement the plan (with annual fees
ranging from $13 to $27.50) was scheduled to go to voters September
1993. However, because of public concerns, the vote was postponed
a year in order to present a more comprehensive water resources
package. The League has continued to work with other groups to
educate the public and promote the funding package.
Having witnessed
the activity in the northern part of the county, residents of
southern Thurston County began to mobilize to protect their groundwater
from the long-term effects of gravel mining. The county responded
by putting a moratorium on gravel permits until there could be
further study, and planned to include protection for the southern
area in the final comprehensive funding package.
The
Video Age
Should you make
a video? When making your decision, consider costs, time, plans
for distribution and use of the video, and your experience in the
medium or access to professionals with experience.
Sample
League videos
The Rockford,
Illinois League's video, Groundwater Protection In
Winnebago County, is an appealing, well paced treatment of the
issues, presented in 18 minutes. The video took six months to
prepare, and cost the League $2,800 in out-of pocket expenses,
and an in-kind contribution of $5,400 from WIFR-TV, a local television
station that produced it. The League showed the video at countless
meetings around the county, including a county board meeting before
an important vote on revisions to the Board of Health's sewage
disposal code. The regional planning committee has purchased copies
for each of the high schools in the county. Since the video's
18-minute length made it difficult for the local network and public
access cable stations to schedule, WIFR-TV agreed to film an additional
12 minutes of local officials talking about the importance of
protecting groundwater.
The Tucson, Arizona League,
with assistance from teachers and students of Pueblo High School
and a neighborhood advisory group, produced English and Spanish
language versions of a 10-minute video on the proper disposal
of household hazardous waste. Production cost $4,000 and took
seven months. The video was shown periodically on the public access
television channel to promote use of the city's household hazardous
waste collection centers and provided to the county Department
of Environmental Quality to incorporate into ongoing environmental
education programs.
Most Leagues that organized public forums videotaped them for
rebroadcast on the community cable access network or for individual
distribution on video cassette. This is an inexpensive, fairly
low tech way of extending your project's reach. (It also may serve
to put on record any commitments made or positions taken by elected
officials or agency representatives.) In most cases the tapes
were edited for length, although this posed continuity problems
in some cases. The LWV of Louisiana's
all-day forum aired, unedited, in two segments on the local public
access channel.
Back
to top
Case
Study 3:
Video Illuminates Major Groundwater Issues in County
Winnebago
County, Illinois, with porous sand and gravel overlying its aquifer
of fractures limestone, has 805 active and 170 inactive hazardous
waste sites. Seventeen of these sites (five of which are Superfund
sites) are on the Illinois Environmental Protection Agency's Priority
Clean-up List. Toxic organic chemicals have polluted groundwater
in public and private wells. Although the Illinois Groundwater
Protection Act (1987) called for wellhead protection measures
that included a survey of potential sources of pollution in areas
surrounding public drinking water wells, many pollution sources
were grandfathered back into the resulting set-back zones.
Principal
Issues
Although
Winnebago County depends entirely on groundwater for public and
private water supplies, Rockford and other municipalities in the
county have no municipal ordinances for groundwater protection,
and groundwater is not considered in city or county planning.
Since 1981, six city wells in Rockford have been closed because
of contamination. Although water is plentiful at present, pollution
and increasing use by industry and other consumers are expected
to continue to reduce the amount of usable water.
Taskforce
To begin,
the LWV of Rockford established "P.O.W.E.R" (Protect Our Water
and Environmental Resources), the project taskforce, with a steering
committee of local officials, community representatives and members
of the natural resources committee of the LWV of Rockford. The
taskforce set up committees for video production, media and public
relations and a speakers bureau.
Knowledge
Survey / Public Outreach
Project leaders
developed a question-and-answer sheet on groundwater for distribution
at four area shopping malls and the county fair. The responses
to the questionnaire were analyzed pro bono by Health Services
Research at the University of Illinois College of Medicine at
Rockford. When the survey results demonstrated a clear need for
public education, the taskforce asked a local television station
for help in producing a video on groundwater protection. WIFR-TV,
Rockford, agreed to work with the League to produce a video for
the $2,600 budgeted. From October 1991 to February 1992 the taskforce
wrote, filmed and edited the video.
In the meantime,
taskforce members arranged to show Power to Protect, a video profiling
groundwater protection efforts in three northeast communities
(see Resources section) at luncheons to community water department
supervisors, city and county planners, economic developers, realtors,
county board members, the county health department environmental
director and other task force members. They also spoke about the
need for groundwater protection in the county and showed Power
to Protect to the Environmental Quality Committee of the chamber
of commerce, the advisory council of the Winnebago County Board
of Health, fly fishers at a nearby forest reserve, the board of
the LWV of Rockford, and the Northern Illinois Regional Groundwater
Protection Planning Committee. City mayors, village presidents,
and county board chairs in Winnebago County were invited to attend
P.O.W.E.R. meetings.
Groundwater
Protection In Winnebago County
A sneak preview
of the Rockford League's 18 minute video, Groundwater Protection
in Winnebago County, was held at a Health and Fitness Show at
an area shopping mall. It officially premiered March 31, 1992
at the University of Illinois College of Medicine at Rockford,
with guest speaker Ken Lustig, Environmental Director of the Panhandle
Health District in Coeur d'Alene, Idaho. (Lustig serves on the
steering committee of the LWVEF Groundwater Education Project.)
WIFR-TV and the local cable channel both agreed to show the video
during National Drinking Water Week. To fill a half-hour time
slot, WIFR filmed a special 12-minute segment of local officials
talking about the importance of protecting the water. The P.O.W.E.R.
taskforce also produced a brochure to accompany the video. The
video, Groundwater Protection in Winnebago County, was shown to
numerous groups during April, May and June 1992. Presenters answered
questions and distributed brochures and question-and-answer sheets
following each viewing.
Follow-Up
Knowledge Survey
In July and
August 1992, taskforce members returned to the same shopping malls
and county fair visited a year earlier, to conduct a follow-up
survey. Again the Health Services Research staff at the University
of Illinois College of Medicine donated their expertise in analyzing
the data. Analysis of questionnaires distributed in summer 1992
indicated increased public understanding of groundwater issues
after the one-year public education campaign. The survey also
indicated that Groundwater Protection in Winnebago County helped
people understand the county's special concerns regarding groundwater.
Spin-Offs
The League's
project manager was appointed to the Winnebago County Board of
Health in October 1991. In February 1992, she presented the following
proposals to the Board of Health:
- Test all
new wells for organic chemicals as well as nitrates and bacteria.
- Address
well abandonment more effectively.
- Develop
public education program regarding private wells, private sewage
disposal systems, and the sealing of abandoned wells.
- Consider
establishing a new county staff position of Groundwater Protection
Coordinator.
She is continuing
to work through the Board of Health to implement stricter health
codes for the county and to facilitate the hiring of a Groundwater
Protection Coordinator for the county.
After revising
its sewage disposal code, the county health department invited
P.O.W.E.R. to show Groundwater Protection in Winnebago County
at the County Board meeting in September 1992, to brief officials
on groundwater protection before voting on the revisions. After
the project ended, the P.O.W.E.R. task force continued to show
the video to groups throughout the county. The video has been
purchased by many organizations, including Rockford College, the
Water Departments of Rockford, Loves Park and North Park, the
Rock River Water Reclamation District, the Winnebago County Health
Department, the Illinois Department of Public Health and the Illinois
Environmental Protection Agency. The P.O.W.E.R. taskforce has
continued to review options for a groundwater protection plan
for the county.
Back
to top
Case
Study 4
Building Coalitions Across County Lines
In a joint
effort, the San Antonio Area and San Marcos, Texas Leagues launched
a public education campaign on the protection of the Edwards Aquifer,
a water bearing layer of cavernous, fractured and cracked limestone.
Extending 175 miles, the Edwards underlies four counties in South-Central
Texas and provided drinking water for about 1.5 million people.
Portions of the Edwards Aquifer have been designated a sole-source
aquifer by the U.S. EPA, and both San Marcos and San Antonio depend
entirely on groundwater from their public water supply. Owing
to the regions hydrology, the aquifer is recharged by water falling
on 11 counties and so it requires region-wide management. Efforts
to produce a regional management plan for the aquifer had stalled,
however, because concerned parties could not agree as to who would
pay, who benefits and who has the power to govern and regulate.
Users devided into three factions, the "ranch" people in the west,
the "spring" people to the east and the "municipal" people in
the San Antonio area. The cooperation of the two area leagues
was an important element in the project's success. Because reconciliation
of regional interests is critical to resolving management of a
hydrological unit that covers several counties, the goal of the
grant project was to bring together people from all areas of the
region. joint management of the project and a focus on water quality
issues helped achieve this goal.
Principal
Issues
Concerns
about the contamination of the aquifer include the large number
of septic tank systems over the recharge area, pesticide and fertilizer
use and agricultural runoff in the western counties, underground
hydrocarbon storage tanks, abandoned wells that may be illegally
used for dumping, and urban runoff. Contaminants can travel quickly
without much filtering through the cavernous limestone. The Texas
Water Commission has initiated an inventory of potential pollution
sources around 350 public water supply wells in the Edwards Aquifer
area, as part of the state's wellhead protection program.
Concerns
about water supply have grown in recent years, as well, with the
depletion of aquifer-fed springs and other signs of overpumping.
Calls to limit pumping, however, conflict with state law—and
strongly held tradition—that allows unlimited rights of capture
of underground sources of water in Texas. And the state's rapid
growth—the population of Texas is the second fastest growing
in the country—is causing intense development pressure on
the Edward's Aquifer recharge area. One major new tourist development
planned in the area, a theme park, is expected to service 25,000
people daily.
Choosing
the Project Focus: Water Quality
The Leagues
decided to focus on the issue of water quality, because it held
the most promise for identifying common interests and common goals
for all parties and jurisdictions. While realizing that allocation
questions will have to be addressed in the future, project leaders
determined that focusing on this divisive question at this stage
would be fruitless.
Public
Forum
In order
to get basic information about agency purposes and operations
to the public and to stimulate as much dialogue as possible between
agencies at local, state and federal levels of government, the
Leagues presented a groundwater protection forum entitled "Putting
It Together: Policy and Practice," in November 1991. Cosponsored
by the Edwards Underground Water District, the forum focused on
the multiple jurisdictions involved in protecting the aquifer
from pollution and the variety of pollutants that potentially
could affect the sole source of water for this region.
Because fostering
dialogue among agency representatives was as much a project goal
as educating the public, forum organizers invited senior staff
in charge of groundwater protection, as well as high-level office
holders, to serve on discussion panels. Panelists included the
general manager of the Edwards Underground Water District, a local
state representative, the mayor of San Marcos, the San Antonio
planning director, a representative of the U.S. EPA Region 6 Office
of Groundwater, and representatives of the groundwater protection
divisions of the Texas Water Commission, the Texas Water Development
Board, the state Attorney General's Office, the Texas Railroad
Commission and the Department of Transportation. The mayor of
San Antonio gave the welcoming speech and the chair of the Texas
Water Commission delivered the keynote address. The meeting agenda
included a map and cross section of the aquifer and included information
on some of the regional groundwater concerns (Figure 8—not
shown on-line).
Approximately
175 people attended, including public officials, planning commissioners,
water purveyors, farmers and ranchers and small business owners.
Organizers arranged for the local public television station to
interview the major speakers, and these and other relevant interviews
were edited into a special one-hour edition of a weekly public
affairs program. Media coverage was good, particularly because
of the importance of Water Commission Chairman John Hall's call
for unity on regional management. After the forum, both San Antonio
papers ran special sections on the aquifer.
Spin-Offs/Continuing
Progress
The forum
helped establish the Leagues' credibility as important players
in the debate over management of the Edwards Aquifer. Since the
forum, the Leagues have worked with a coalition of regional groups
to secure the purchase of 5,000 acres of Resolution Trust Corporation
property on the Recharge and Transition Zones of the Edwards Aquifer
known as Government Canyon. The acquired land will be managed
by the Edwards Underground Water District and the Texas Department
of Parks and Wildlife under a "sensitive area" protection plan.
The coalition's activities included generating educational material
and presentations, continued coalition-building, working with
agency staff to educate board members, and advocating the land
purchase at board meetings.
The San Antonio
Area League, along with six other local organizations, received
a World Wildlife Fund 1992 Innovations Grant—a $5,000 challenge
grant—to organize, incorporate and devise an educational/marketing
strategy for the establishment of Bexar Land Trust, which would
serve as a private conservation organization for protecting recharge
zone land and other ecological and environmental attributes of
the area.
The San Antonio
Area League also is working with Aquifer Guardians in Urban Areas
(AGUA), a coalition of San Antonio groups working to propose comprehensive
revisions to current regulations for recharge and drainage zone
development. Developing bilingual education products is a priority
of this effort.
To follow
up the November 1991 forum, the San Antonio Area LWV hosted a
public meeting on "Putting It Together: Regional Water Management
Issues" in June 1992. Invitations were sent to the same mailing
list used for the fall forum. The audience had many questions
regarding the issues of regional water management and new Texas
Water Commission rules. Panelists included a West Texas Water
Commissioner, the newly appointed board chair of the San Antonio
Water System and the president/CEO of the San Antonio Water System.
One of the
project managers was appointed to the Groundwater Subcommittee
of the Texas Clean Water Council, a taskforce organized by the
Texas Water Commission to set the commission's legislative and
administrative agenda for the 73rd Texas legislative session and
for the commission's administrative reorganizations. She also
was appointed to the U.S. EPA's Effluent Guidelines Taskforce
charged with helping to devise policy and procedural improvements
to the Effluent Guidelines under the Clean Water Act. Her work
focused on the issues of incentives and disincentives for pollution
prevention and the problems of the transfer of pollutants between
different media.
Back
to top
Manual
Index
Acknowledgments
Introduction
Chapter 1: Getting Started
Chapter 2: Researching and Developing
information
Chapter 3: Development and Distribution
of Materials
Chapter 4: Public Meetings,
Forums and Workshops
Chapter
5: Publicity
Chapter 6: Fundraising
Chapter 7: Keeping It Going
Case
Study 1: Well Survey Builds Commitment to Groundwater
Case Study 2: "Training the Trainers" Keeps Protection Efforts
Moving
Case Study 3: Video Illuminates Major Groundwater
Issues in County
Case Study 4: Building
Coalitions Across County Lines
Appendix A: League Community
Groundwater Education Projects
Appendix B: Sources of
Groundwater Contamination
Appendix C: Data Collection
Form: General Roles/Duties/Authorities
Appendix D: Data Collection
Form: Local/State/Federal Management Status
Appendix E: Resources
| 
