NEW ORLEANS – In a newly released report, the Tulane Institute on Water Resources Law & Policy calls on local governments to take a proactive role in water management in Louisiana and explores the role of the private sector.
“As the federal government retreats from its role in environmental protection and regulation, state, local, and tribal governments face a critical choice: either step up and fill these regulatory gaps with innovative solutions or be left to deal with the consequences of deteriorating water quality and increasing water scarcity,” said Haley Gentry, Assistant Director, Tulane Institute on Water Resources Law & Policy.
Gentry is the lead author of the recently released report “Lessening Uncertainty: Pathways for State and Local Governments to Improve Water Management in the Mississippi River Corridor” which explores how state and local governments are developing innovative approaches to fill the regulatory void.
“Along the Mississippi River Corridor, businesses and communities face growing challenges from degraded water quality, from nitrate contamination in Minnesota’s groundwater to saltwater in South Louisiana,” said Gentry.
Groundwater
New data from one of the pumping stations drawing water from the Southern Hills Aquifer, the main drinking water source for the Baton Rouge area, has reignited concerns over groundwater use in the region. “In the past three years, chloride levels (the amount of salt in the water), have gone up 16% at one pumping station,” said Gentry. “The primary cause of saltwater intrusion in the Southern Hils Aquifer—overpumping for industrial use—has been known for decades, yet little has been done to address the issue.”
In the 1970s, saltwater intrusion into the aquifer prompted the state legislature to create the Capital Area Groundwater Conservation District and Commission to regulate groundwater production for public supply and industrial uses in the parishes of Ascension, East Baton Rouge, West Baton Rouge, East Feliciana, West Feliciana, and Point Coupee. “It did not do much by way of exercising its authority until the past several years when it sought to increase pumping fees and standardize water use data collection, which has been the subject of litigation,” said Gentry.
In response to recent aquifer data, the Commission voted to conduct a study to better understand the problem and improve management strategies, but its authority is limited to a small region, leaving most of Louisiana's groundwater and surface water with minimal oversight.
“There will soon come a point when groundwater use must be comprehensively managed and subject to use restrictions, not just in Louisiana, but across the country,” said Gentry. “The United States is on the cusp of a groundwater crisis from decades, perhaps a century, of mismanagement. Inaction is not an option.”
The Business Costs of Dirty Water
“When the federal government reduces protections for certain waters and wetlands, the associated costs do not simply go away; they merely fall on someone other entity to either take up the regulatory responsibilities or deal with adverse impacts from deregulation,” said Gentry. “Protecting fewer waters and wetlands under continually weakening federal standards means that states and local entities will bear increased costs to protect public health and welfare.”
“One area of concern is the costs and challenges from the rollback of Clean Water Act jurisdiction and potential increased development in wetlands and flood prone areas. Though the Federal Emergency Management Agency administers the National Flood Insurance Program, a locality must have a designated local floodplain manager that implements minimum flood management standards to make policies available for purchase in the community. Until now, local managers could assume that a good chunk of floodplain wetlands would be subject to the Clean Water Act’s dredge and fill regulations, and any permit holder would be required to mitigate impacts to ecosystem functions, like stormwater retention. Now, after the “Sackett v. Environmental Protection Agency” Supreme Court case, the EPA and Army Corps do not have jurisdiction over wide swaths of wetlands and streams. There will be greater challenges in managing flood risk and could lead to increased costs on local governments who can no longer rely on mitigation.”
Water does not recognize jurisdictional boundaries. “There are four different federal circuit courts along the Mississippi River’s main stem,” said Gentry. “However, differing state and local standards have always been something businesses have to deal with, not just for environmental matters, but all areas of regulation.”
The Insurance-Regulation Connection
“Building homes in previously federally-protected wetlands may lead to more homes that flood which can lead to higher insurance costs and even uninsurability. The National Flood Insurance Program, the largest flood insurance provider in the U.S., could experience more direct adverse impacts from both the shifting regulatory landscape and more broadly, recent federal funding cuts to housing and disaster programs.”
The shift of responsibility from FEMA to states raises questions about capacity, funding, and rebuilding standards. “The federal government is attempting to claw back billions in climate resilience grants while undoing environmental protections, which could spell trouble for future insurance markets and investment decisions as important risk-reduction measures are lost,” said Gentry.
Private Sector’s Role
The Clean Water Act and Coastal Zone Management Act include aquatic resource mitigation requirements which are often managed by private sector companies. According to Gentry, if a state were to adopt stricter wetlands regulations with compensatory mitigation permits, it could create economic opportunities in the environmental services and consulting industries.
“At the local level, new zoning measures and climate-resilient infrastructure projects could lead to new projects and job creation,” said Gentry. “For example, Wisconsin recently created a pre-disaster mitigation grant program to assess flood vulnerabilities and implement flood risk-reduction projects. Local bond measures, like recent ones in Florida, can fund local conservation programs.”
In addition, some startups are focused on reducing the water footprint of emerging technologies according to Gentry. “Other companies are working on products, particularly in the agricultural sector, that can improve soil health and reduce pollutant runoff,” said Gentry. “With the current cuts to federally-funded scientific research and data collection and monitoring programs, there could be additional spaces where businesses might play a larger role.
Positive Work
Gentry says communities that implement stormwater management programs and codes relating to localized flood risk can make properties eligible for discounts under the National Flood Insurance Program. Central, Louisiana, is one example of how improved stormwater management measures can reduce costs to residents and businesses.
“Farther away, the entire continued existence and growth of Las Vegas is possible only through innovative water management solutions,” said Gentry.
