Farm Pollution Threatens Drinking Water, Says New EWG Study
The Environmental Working Group (EWG) study, which focused on Illinois, Iowa, Minnesota and Wisconsin, showed that nutrient overload in surface and groundwater is a significant water quality problem for these states, making nitrate and phosphorus levels higher and algal blooms more frequent compared to national averages.
To handle polluted source water, water utilities in the region are often forced to install expensive treatment plants that can cost millions to install and operate. U.S. Deprtament of Agriculture economists estimate that removing nitrate from drinking water costs more than $4.8 billion a year. The cost of dealing with algal blooms is particularly difficult. The total capital cost of water treatment that would address cyanobacterial blooms and cyanotoxins can range between $12 million and $56 million for a town of 100,000 people.
The EWG study says the only true solution is to confront the issue upstream, where pollution—much of it from farms—first flows into America's surface water and groundwater. This year's debate over renewing the federal farm bill is a referendum on America's commitment to protecting our drinking water supplies at the source.
Besides large animal feeding operations, farm businesses are exempt from the pollution control requirements of the federal Clean Water Act, and few states have authority to force farm businesses to adopt practices that reduce the amount of farm pollution reaching our rivers, lakes and bays. As a result, the farm bill, which is renewed every five years, serves as the primary tool for addressing the environmental damage caused by polluted runoff from agricultural operations.
According to EWG’s report, Congress should take these steps to ensure the new farm bill protects drinking water:
- Reform Farm Subsidies: Congress should end direct payments, reduce subsidies for farm insurance programs and refuse to create new farm entitlement programs that encourage all-out production to the detriment of the environment. Instead, lawmakers should help farmers when they suffer deep losses in yields and provide options for them to purchase additional crop and revenue insurance at their own expense;
- Renew the Conservation Compact: Congress should renew the "conservation compliance" provisions of the 1985 farm bill by relinking wetland and soil protection requirements to crop insurance programs. In addition, legislators should require farm businesses that receive subsidies to update their conservation plans and should strengthen the government's enforcement tools; and
- Strengthen Conservation Incentive Programs: Congress should strengthen programs that reward farmers who take steps to protect sources of drinking water. In addition to providing adequate funding, Congress should expand "collaborative conservation" tools that award funds to groups of farmers working together to protect drinking water sources. Greater focus should be placed on restoring buffers and wetlands that filter runoff of farm pollutants.
