|
||
| 30
Years of the Clean Water Act
I was 2 years old in 1972, and living in West Texas when Richard Nixon signed what we now call the Clean Water Act (at the time it was called the Federal Water Pollution Control Act). Being so young, I didn’t understand how polluted the waters of the nation had become. Later, I found out about the Cuyahoga River catching fire, and Lake Erie being declared dead. But those places were far away, and West Texas is VERY dry. There were few recreational opportunities that included water. My summers were spent in the Four Corners area of New Mexico moving irrigation pipe on my uncle’s alfalfa fields. Irrigation ditches crisscrossed the state, moving water to those with “water-rights.” Dead frogs, dogs and horses were common sights in the dark water ditches. I was warned to stay out of the polluted fast moving waters, and punishment was swift if I disobeyed. These man-made watercourses were my only knowledge of streams. Later we moved to San Antonio, where the stormwater flowed in underground tunnels, or concrete lined ditches. The RiverWalk was a beautiful tree-lined trail paralleling a green stinking river. The Clean Water Act (CWA) changed the way Americans treat their water. Before the act, there were no regulations on wastes or toxins dumped into our waterbodies. Now, each municipality is responsible for treating their own wastes. The water from treatment plants is monitored for contaminants such as fecal coliform, biochemical oxygen demand, total suspended solids, oil/grease, and pH. Thanks to the CWA, industries have to apply for a National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit. The permit sets conditions and limitations under which a facility may make a discharge. The NPDES limits for discharges can be based on technology, or set by federal or state water quality criteria. This is where monitoring plays a role. Water quality standards can vary from state to state, and even within a state. From data collected by the University of Missouri staff and LMVP volunteers, we know that pollutants such as atrazine and sediment (suspended solids) are most problematic in the North, while small additions of phosphorus in the clear lakes and streams of the Ozarks can have profound effects. The nation has come along way during the last 30 years. However, there is still work to be done. Many states are facing lawsuits for not complying with the fishable/swimable water quality guidelines set forth in the act. As a result, states are hustling to set Total Maximum Daily Loads (TMDLs) for each impaired waterbody. These TMDLs will set limitations on the amounts of pollutant each waterbody can receive, and still maintain water quality standards. The San Antonio river is fed almost entirely by wastewater, and industrial cooling water. The CWA has allowed for advocacy groups to fight to increase the quality of the water discharged by the wastewater treatment facilities. New treatment facilities have been built, and the San Antonio River has seen the most water quality improvements of any Texas river. Texas, just like Missouri is moving in the right direction, but quality water will always be the goal. Missouri is still a long way from removing all waters from the impairment list, and meeting fishable/swimable standards. New pollutants such as mercury show us that continual water quality monitoring is necessary. With the help of LMVP volunteers, that monitoring is possible. Georganne Bowman click here for more information |
||
 |
||
