The Annual Indiana Water Summit, coming up next week, will offer ideas on protecting the state's waterways.

A 2022 report paints a troubling picture of Indiana's waterways and streams.

The nonprofit Environmental Integrity Project says the Hoosier State has the most miles of contaminated rivers and streams than any other state.

And almost all the lakes and reservoirs sampled are not considered safe for drinking or swimming.

Bill Blomquist - a summit organizer and member of the board of the White River Alliance with the White River Alliance - said the gathering will also include an in-depth conversation on Indiana's water law.

"The reason we started it was for there to be a place for statewide conversations about all aspects of our water resources," said Blomquist, "water supply and water demand, and water quality, environmental, economic uses of our water resources."

Blomquist noted that Indiana is seeing more storm intensity, which can lead to more runoff and greater flood risk.

He said he thinks the most pressing issue of the two-day summit will be whether Indiana needs a state water strategy.

The event is open to the public and will feature a mix of agriculture, utility, and environmental experts. It's at the Biltwell Event Center in Indianapolis.

Blomquist said most people know about emerging contaminants such as PFAS, but not about pesticides and fertilizers that end up running off into state waters.

Concern is growing about the state's water supply, usage and whether there will be enough water where and when it's needed.

Blomquist noted that Indiana is one of the heaviest water-using states in the country.

"We're fortunate because we have a lot of water," said Blomquist. "We have abundant fresh water. But that doesn't mean it's unlimited. That doesn't mean it's infinite. We still have to be smart about how we use it."

Indiana's population is projected to be at just over 7 million by 2040, according to the Environmental Protection Agency.

This means as competition grows for limited water sources, ground and surface water points may not be replenished enough to meet the demand.

By Morgan Sjogren for Reasons to be Cheerful.
Broadcast version by Alex Gonzalez for Utah News Connection reporting for the Solutions Journalism Network-Public News Service Collaboration

The Virgin River cuts through a towering red rock gorge flanked by forested plateaus as it meanders through Washington County in southern Utah. The river is the primary source of water for the fastest-growing metropolitan area in the United States, which includes the city of St. George. Washington County is the largest employment center in southwest Utah, with a population of 200,000 that is expected to double by 2060. 

It’s also the hottest and driest county in Utah, and it’s dependent on a singular water source: the Virgin River Basin. But the Virgin’s waters are thinning from climate-change induced drought and overuse. Water conservation is necessary to meet the increasing demands of growth, and Washington County boasts some of the toughest measures in Utah — including a bold program to “buy” residents’ grass as a way to get them to swap in less water-dependent plants.

Grass is thirsty. Statewide, 70 percent of residential culinary water is used on lawns. By shifting landscaping away from grass and to plants more readily adapted to the climate, the Washington County Water Conservancy District estimates that residents can reduce landscape watering to 11 gallons per square foot annually, compared to 56 gallons for conventional turf.

The Washington County Water Conservancy District began its turf buyback program in December 2022. “Utah is now on the front lines of water conservation,” says Doug Bennett, conservation manager for the district and a leader in developing turf buyback programs across the West. “The turf buyback program is at the forefront of the county’s conservation strategy. Conservation doesn’t require expansion of infrastructure, making it the most cost effective water supply strategy.”

Bennett credits the success of Washington County’s program to a streamlined, incentive-based system. He explains, “I like to say it’s as simple as check in, dig in, cash in.” Residents first register for the incentive program. Next, the conservancy district sends someone to document the square feet of turf to be replaced on the property. Residents then have one year to complete their projects. When the yard is ready, there is one more county inspection. The resident receives a check a few weeks later.

The payout is $2 per square foot of converted turf, up to 5,000 square feet. After that, the rate is $1 per square foot. That money is cost-shared between the Washington County Water Conservancy and the state of Utah, which matches the county dollar for dollar. The Utah Legislature allocated $8 million dollars to launch the program, with $3 million recurring annually. To maintain and grow the program, proponents are requesting an additional $12 million from the state legislature. 

Participants can select from an extensive list of native plants that are adapted to need less water, including fragrant sagebrush, yucca, succulents and wildflowers like the firecracker penstemon. There are some specific parameters to qualify for the program, such as installing drip irrigation. Mulch must be placed on the soil’s surface to reduce evaporation. At maturity, plants must cover 50 percent of the project area. Non-permeable barriers like concrete and plastic are not permitted because they prevent rainfall and air from passing through the soil. Bennett notes, “We want the plants to thrive!” Artificial turf is allowed, so long as it has perforations for water and air. The program also requires a conservation easement for the property, to ensure that current or future residents will never return grass to the project area.

To date, 2,044 applications have been submitted and 918 projects completed in Washington County. “We’re projecting that by the end of 2024, our program participants will have transformed enough nonfunctional lawn to be equivalent to a roll of sod about 280 miles long,” Bennett says. “Collectively, these projects should reach 100 million gallons in annual savings by year’s end.” That is enough water to supply 520 single family households.

Bennett recognizes that increased education will boost public participation. He recalls the slow start when Las Vegas launched a similar program: “In 2000, nobody cared. Then in 2002, the drought was so severe that the Colorado River produced just 25 percent of its typical runoff.” (That same drought across the Southwest has persisted for two decades and is known to be the worst in 1,200 years.) Twenty-two years later, Las Vegas’s daily per capita water use has been cut in half. “It was unprecedented for a community [to] save that much without actually just shutting off the water,” Bennett says.

Since 2000, Washington County has reduced per capita water use by 30 percent, the most significant decrease in Utah. Bennett attributes this success to the realities of living in the desert: “Our residents live on the northern edge of the Mojave Desert, and it’s pretty conspicuous by the native terrain,” he explains. In other words, they have “relatively high awareness of the scarcity of water” they face because the landscape itself provides constant reminders.

That’s not the case elsewhere in Utah. “The other major population centers are in the northern part of the state, characterized by mountain ranges, cold and snowy winters and a perception of water abundance,” Bennett says. “Most recently, drought conditions that affected the Great Salt Lake have escalated awareness of hydrologic conditions in northern Utah.”

Despite Washington County’s per capita water savings, because of its rapid growth and development, its overall water use has still increased by 15 percent since the turn of the century. In short, existing water conservation measures do not fully offset the pressure that growth is putting on the water system. This has pushed the county to set the strictest ordinances for new construction and landscaping in Utah. The county now limits lawns to eight percent of property size on all new residential developments. There is a total ban on “nonfunctional grass” at new commercial, institutional and industrial developments. This even prevents new golf course developments. (The caveat is that golf course developers must come up with their own non-potable water source and secondary recycled water sources for irrigation.) The county also reuses water to irrigate public spaces like parks, schools, golf courses and county facilities. 

Through turf buyback and other conservation measures, Washington County aims to reduce per capita water use by another 14 percent by 2030. The county also has a 20-year plan to diversify and conserve water sources, which includes tiered water rates, water recycling and education.

As part of this effort, the new Chief Toquer Reservoir is under construction 20 miles northeast of St. George. The $75 million project, slated for completion in 2025, includes a 19-mile underground pipeline intended to retain up to 3,500 acre-feet of water that is currently lost to seepage at nearby Ash Creek Reservoir.

Meanwhile, a controversial proposal for a 143-mile Lake Powell pipeline, which would import 86,000 acre-feet of water to Washington County, has not progressed amid ongoing efforts to maintain adequate water levels in the reservoir. This was previously considered the savior of Washington County’s water woes, but the hamstrung project has pushed the region to look toward conservation instead. Despite last winter’s above average precipitation, the Colorado River’s Lake Mead and Lake Powell — the largest reservoirs in the country — are only at 36 and 31 percent of capacity respectively. 

The Colorado River supplies water to 40 million people across its basin. The Virgin, a tributary of the Colorado, cascades from a cave tucked high in the pink cliffs of the Markagunt Plateau, before flowing through Zion National Park on its way to a 500-million-year-old gorge. On its descent, it enters seven reservoirs that distribute water across Washington County. One hundred and sixty miles from its source, the remaining water arrives at Lake Mead in the northern Mojave Desert. 

High demand and aridification have reduced the Colorado River system’s flows — including the Virgin’s. Utah is one of seven states (along with Arizona, California, Nevada, New Mexico, Colorado and Wyoming) that must cut down on Colorado River consumption and create a new drought management plan by 2026. While the states don’t yet align on the best approach, there is one water conservation effort they all agree upon: to reduce non-functional turf by 30 percent.

In 2023, the Utah Legislature approved a water-efficient landscaping program as part of the state’s goal to reduce per-capita water use by 25 percent by 2025. Utah is implementing landscaping parameters that restrict lawns to no more than 50 percent of a landscaped area in new residential developments (still much higher than Washington County’s eight percent.) Three other water conservancy districts in Utah have implemented landscaping ordinances, but they are not as expansive as what is included in Washington County’s program. “The state funding may not be used on parks or golf courses, but Washington County’s program includes them,” Bennett notes. “We also rebate conversion of manmade water features such as swimming pools, ponds and ornamental streams.” The county also created its own customer engagement process, which Bennett points to as one reason that participation has been higher here than in the other districts: “It makes it a bit easier for customers to communicate with our program and understand the status of their project.” 

While removing turf can make a big difference in residential water use, that alone cannot shoulder the burden of reducing water consumption. The majority of Washington County water is used for irrigation; statewide, a whopping 68 percent of diverted water is used to grow alfalfa for the beef and dairy industry. This is even higher than other Colorado River states, which utilize an average of 46 percent of water diverted from the river to grow alfalfa and other cattle feed crops. A recent study shows that reducing demand for these products can create some of the biggest water savings from citizens. 

And while turf buyback programs and other water conservation measures are designed to ensure an adequate water supply for a growing population, it’s also important to consider a more fundamental need: to keep water flowing in the Virgin River. The river shapes the iconic landscape of Zion National Park, which draws five million visitors per year, and supports wildlife habitat within the park and beyond. Six native fish call the Virgin River home, two of which are endangered.

“There are tremendous water demands on [this] small river,” explains Elaine York, West Desert regional director for The Nature Conservancy in Utah. York says a significant portion of the river between Zion and St. George is conserved, meaning owned and managed by organizations or government agencies to maintain a relatively natural state and function as part of a healthy river system. This includes two parcels purchased by The Nature Conservancy, which is working with the Virgin River Program — a collaborative effort between local, state, and federal partners — on efforts to balance human water use with conserving the Virgin River ecosystem and protecting native (and some endangered) species. Among these projects, The Nature Conservancy is working with Hurricane, a small city near Zion National Park, to fund and redesign a more efficient water delivery system that reduces water loss during transport.

While grass buyback programs alone won’t save the Virgin or the Colorado River, they are an effective way citizens can cut their daily water use — and a clear demonstration of how successful and lasting changes in water use can begin with government-led incentives that incite broader cultural shifts. For now, Bennett is encouraged by Washington County’s buy-in to rip out turf. “Southern Utah residents have been very receptive to water conservation measures,” he says. “The projects we’re seeing are proof that we can sustain an even higher quality of life while leaving a smaller footprint on our watersheds.”


Morgan Sjogren wrote this article for Reasons to be Cheerful.


get more stories like this via email

As South Dakotans affected by recent record floods take stock of damages, researchers say water quality is among the concerns.

The state has been collecting damage data - but some impacts, like water contamination from livestock operations, are harder to quantify.

According to the nonprofit Food and Water Watch, coming into contact with or consuming manure-contaminated water can increase the risks of E. coli, giardia, and other waterborne illnesses. And those can lead to kidney failure, intestinal complications or cancer.

Amanda Starbuck, research director at Food and Water Watch, said public water systems are tested for these contaminants - but private, rural wells may not be.

"There's a lot of concerns about rural communities and their waters," said Starbuck, "and whether they have the ability, the financial resources, to test and to remediate any kind of contaminations that do stem from these factory farms."

Huge June rainstorms caused the Big Sioux River to swell up to 45 feet - breaking the previous record by seven feet, according to NASA, and inundating nearby farmlands.

Starbuck said South Dakota has some of the highest concentrations of confined beef, dairy and hog operations in the country.

Starbuck added that, according to a Food and Water Watch analysis, the state's factory farms produce nearly 22 billion pounds of manure each year.

"So, that's 17.5 times as much sewage as produced by the state's entire human population," said Starbuck. "So, we're talking about unsustainable amounts of livestock in these confinement operations."

She said the manure output should be of concern regardless of flooding. Still, river floodplains are expected to grow in coming years, according to a FEMA report.




get more stories like this via email

New York environmentalists want the Environmental Protection Agency to re-dredge the Hudson River. This comes after the agency released its latest five-year review saying more information is needed on the dredging efforts, although progress has been made. However, other reports show the EPA's dredging efforts failed, leaving the river riddled with PCBs.

Pete Lopez, executive director for science policy and advocacy with Scenic Hudson, said the EPA's reduction targets aren't being met.

"EPA has done its best to get massive amounts out of the river, but there are massive amounts left in the river, in our opinion, that are causing PCB levels to remain persistently high and dangerous. And, EPA is not addressing it. They're kicking the can down the road," he said.

Lopez thinks the agency should investigate where high levels of PCBs are and determine how to keep fish and humans safe from them. The EPA says more annual fish data can help discern whether the cleanup is meeting the expectations of the original plan. Once the data are available, the agency will issue an addendum to the current five-year report no later than the end of 2027. A public comment period on the five-year review is being held until October, with more information available at epa.gov/hudsonriverpcbs.

The river was dredged from 2009 to 2015 to remove 30 years' worth of chemicals General Electric dumped into it. Although the EPA warns against eating fish caught in the Hudson between Troy and Hudson Falls, people still eat them, which can lead to serious health impacts. Lopez said elected officials across party lines and different state regions want the EPA to take action in cleaning up the Hudson River.

"One would think that if 22 members of Congress, a U.S. senator and leaders of the Black and Puerto Rican caucus reached out, that you would step back and think about this, and maybe want to engage with them and talk with them."

Instead, he feels actions from the EPA have been "Pro-forma correspondence," sticking to the agency's assurance that the data aren't wrong.