From the August 1999 Authority View newsletter

by John Gaston, Executive Director, Stony Brook Regional SA

The latest annual environmental lobby report warns that the sky is falling, that the state Department of Environmental Protection is failing to do its job and that most wastewater dischargers are clones of Darth Vader.  Certainly there is work to be done, but there is also reason for optimism.

Here are a few thoughts on where our attention should be focused:    

           1. The Whippany watershed study proves that following a methodical watershed assessment process may yield results counter to expectations.  For instance, heavy metals and phosphorus are not problems for the Whippany River system, even though everyone targeted them as critical issues from day one of the study.  Most carefully done studies may produce conclusions that contradict preconceived beliefs.    

           2. Members of the environmental lobby who criticize the state for doing such a poor job in water quality management should check with the fish, which are returning to major waterways in record numbers because their critical habitats are being restored.  This is the result of a cooperative effort involving a broad list of parties working in a non-confrontational atmosphere.    

           3. The Navesink River shellfish restoration program is a terrific model for improving water quality in a watershed.  Participants worked together to produce results over a 10-year period.  Well-conceived, publicly supported plans precluded knee-jerk decision-making and misdirected efforts.    

           4. With five drought warnings in 15 years, managing water resources in northeastern New Jersey is a serious public question.  This is particularly true since the 1996 state water supply master plan says that we have enough water for the next 40 years.  Maybe a continuation of the drought of 1998 will generate interest in this volatile issue.

           5. In the struggle to provide the highest level of utility and public services, all utilities want the lowest cost for their customers, but only cooperation and integrated planning will yield least cost to all customers.  This is a tough sell in New Jersey, where jurisdictions overlap and institutions compete.  Water, sewer and land-use entities have different agendas.  Under these circumstances, the temptation to dodge responsibility and to blame another institution is great.  However, it is unproductive.

The last round of water resource planning in the late 70s and early 80s has largely been implemented by water and sewerage facilities.  The next major set of water quality and supply improvements will require broad support and a plan of attack against nonpoint pollution sources.  This can be generated only by scientifically and economically valid studies.  Financial requirements will necessitate cooperation among legislative, executive and local interests.  Facts must be presented to convince those with the power and the resources to use them wisely.