Thursday, November 16, 2017

New Study finds no Cancer Link to Glyphosate

A new study published last week in the Journal of the National Cancer Institute found no association between cancer and exposure to glyphosate, the active ingredient in the herbicide “Roupndup” and the most commonly used herbicide worldwide. In 2015, the International Agency for Research on Cancer classified glyphosate as “probably carcinogenic to humans,” noting strong mechanistic evidence and positive associations for non-Hodgkin lymphoma (NHL) in some epidemiologic studies; though previous evaluations had found no statistically significant associations with glyphosate use and any cancer,

This new study is part of the Agricultural Health Study which has been tracking the health of thousands of agricultural workers and pesticide applicators and their families in Iowa and North Carolina for over 20 years. The study was led by Laura Beane Freeman of the National Cancer Institute. The Agricultural Health Study has tracked and studied 54,251 pesticide applicators, 44,932 or 82.9% who had used glyphosate since the 1990’s.

The scientists studied of glyphosate use and cancer occurrence in this large group of pesticide applicators, and observed no associations between glyphosate use and overall cancer risk or with total lymphohematopoietic cancers, including NHL and multiple myeloma. However, the scientist found some evidence of an increased risk of acute myeloid leukemia (AML) for applicators, particularly in the highest category of glyphosate exposure compared with those who never used glyphosate. The fact that no other studies have reported an association between glyphosate and AML risk calls for cautious interpretation of the results. However, the observed pattern of increasing risk with increasing exposure and the lagged exposure of 10 or more years raises concern and the need for additional long term studies.

Today, Americans spray an estimated 180-185 million pounds of the weed killer, on their yards and farms every year. All the acute toxicity tests have indicated glyphosate is nearly nontoxic to mammals, but concern has been raised about long term exposure. The current findings are reassuring, but given the prevalence of use of this herbicide not only in the United States but worldwide, efforts should be undertaken to replicate these findings as soon as possible.

Monday, November 13, 2017

Arsenic in Your Well Water

A new study from the U.S. Geological Survey and Centers for Disease Control and Prevention was released last month. The author estimates that about 2.1 million people in the U.S. may be getting their drinking water from private domestic wells considered to have high concentrations of naturally occurring arsenic, presumed to be coming primarily from rocks and minerals through which the water flows.

About 44 million people in the lower 48 states use water from domestic wells,” said Joe Ayotte, a USGS hydrologist and lead author of the study. Private wells are the dominant source of drinking water for people living in rural parts of the United States. In most of the U.S., domestic well water quality is not regulated; it is up to the well owner to understand the arsenic hazard and other water quality hazards and take steps to test their water and treat it if necessary. This study is a good reminder that prudent, routine testing of the water is an essential first step for these homeowners and their families.

Using water samples from more than 20,000 domestic wells, the researchers developed a statistical model that estimates the probability of having high arsenic in domestic wells in a specific area. The researcher used a standard of 10 micrograms of arsenic per liter -- the maximum contaminant level allowed for public water supplies and used it developed maps of the contiguous U.S. showing locations where there are likely higher levels of arsenic in groundwater, and how many people may be using it. They used that model in combination with information on the U.S. domestic well population to estimate the population in each county of the continental United States with potentially high concentrations of arsenic in domestic wells.

Much of the country is potentially impacted by arsenic and is a national public health concern. Some of the locations where the authors estimated the most people have high-levels of arsenic in private domestic well water include:
  • Much of the West – Washington, Oregon, Nevada, California, Arizona, New Mexico
  • Parts of the Northeast and Midwest – Maine, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, New Jersey, Maryland, Michigan, Wisconsin, Illinois Ohio, Indiana
  • Some of the Atlantic southeast coastal states – Florida, Virginia, North Carolina, South Carolina
Long-term exposure to arsenic in domestic wells may cause health-related problems, including an increased risk of cancer. Recent work in the U.S. also indicates that low-level arsenic may impact fetal growth and may be related to preterm birth. Public water supplies are regulated by the U.S. EPA, but maintenance, testing and treatment of private water supplies are the sole responsibility of the homeowner. Though about 44 million people in the U.S. get their drinking water from private wells, surveys indicate many homeowners are unaware of some basic testing that should be done to help ensure safe drinking water in the home.

Like may other contaminants, high concentrations of arsenic in water do not effect taste or smell, the only way to know how much arsenic is in drinking water is to have it tested. Testing you well is the first step in ensuring the safety of your drinking water supply. After testing it may be necessary to treat the water to reduce or eliminating the health risks or concerns.

You may wish to consider water treatment methods such as reverse osmosis, ultra-filtration, distillation, or as a last choice ion exchange. Typically these methods are used to treat water at only one faucet. Though anionic exchange systems (water softeners) are whole house systems, they may not be the best choice. These systems use a physical/chemical process to exchange ions between a resin bed and water passing through. These systems can remove calcium carbonate, iron and manganese, and lower nitrate and arsenic levels. Specific contaminant removal is determined by the composition of the resin bed used. Other constituents in water can compete with arsenic for the resin sites reducing the systems effectiveness. Also, depending on your water chemistry, they may create other problems.

To understand the risk and to make progress on reducing exposure in a systematic way, we need better understanding of groundwater chemistry and estimates of the population affected by high arsenic concentrations and other contaminants. The work by the USGS and the Virginia Household Quality Program accumulates data and helps homeowners identify these risks.

Thursday, November 9, 2017

Neonicotinoids in Honey

In a recent study published in Science, Mitchell et al found that most honey sampled from around the world between 2012 and 2016 contained neonicotinoid pesticides at levels known to be neuroactive to bees. Neonicotinoid are currently the most widely used class of pesticides worldwide. The neonicotinoids are taken up by plants and contaminate the pollen and nectar. Neonicotinoids have been identified or suspected as a key factor responsible for the decline in bees.

During the winter of 2006-2007, a large number of bee colonies died out, losses at the impacted beekeeping operations were reported to be from 30% to 90%. While many of the colonies lost during this time period exhibited the symptoms from parasitic mites, many were lost, from unknown cause. The next winter, the number of impacted honey bee operations spread across the country. The phenomenon was termed Colony Collapse Disorder.

Over the past decade Colony Collapse Disorder has spread around the world. In 2012, 31% of the U.S. honey bee colonies were wiped out. The year before that it was reported as 21% of colonies lost. These losses if they continue could have a catastrophic impact on agriculture. One third of all food eaten in the United States requires honey bee pollination.

Recent field studies published this year in Science have found widespread contamination of agricultural land worldwide by neonicotinoid pesticides. These findings suggest that chronic low level exposure to neonicotinoids may be impacting bee colonies. Currently pesticide safety testing focuses on acute exposure risk not extremely low levels of chronic exposure. Neonicotinoids work by targeting the nicotinic acetylcholine receptors in the insect brain which are responsible for learning and memory. Acute activation of theses receptors by neonicotinoids causes seizure then neuron non-response.

During experiments carried out by Piroinen et al in 2016 it was found that low level neonicotinoid exposure causes neural dysfunction that limits a bee’s capacity to learn and remember. Chronic exposure resulted in reduced foraging ability (Gill et al 2012) and poor colony growth (Moffat et al 2015, 2016) and is believed to be a factor in Colony Collapse Disorder.

The vast majority of plants are pollinated by insects, and bees are responsible for the vast majority of pollination. Commercial agriculture uses honey bees raised to pollinate its crops. A Cornell University study estimates that the value of honey bee pollination in the United States is more than $14.6 billion annually.

In the current study, Dr. Mitchell found neonicotinoids in 75% of 198 honey samples collected from honey producers. In North America 86% of the samples had neonicotinoids detected. The concentrations found in honey are below the maximum residue level allowed for human consumption, but within the bioactive range for honey bees.

Although recording of pesticide use is required in the European Union and the United States (under the 1990 Farm Bill), it is not collected into a searchable database that would allow the finding of statistical correlation of pesticides used with human chronic diseases or ecosystem damage. Chronic low level exposure may be more damaging than we ever imagined. It is time to reexamine our assumptions and develop methods to measure impact from chronic low level exposure.

Monday, November 6, 2017

Environment Impacts from the Kline Farm Development

Stanley Martin Homes wants to develop farm land owned by the Kline family at the intersection of Prince William Parkway and Libera Avenue. The Prince William County Planning Commission will hold a public hearing on a series of permit requests and zoning changes associated with this development on November 15th 2017 at 7 pm in the Board Chambers of the McCoart Administration Building, 1 County Complex Court, Prince William, VA 22192. If you have an opinion on whether the comprehensive plan and zoning should be amended as described below you should attend and make your voice heard or call you supervisor’s office.

Stanley Martin Homes wants a Comprehensive Plan Amendment (CPA) to change the long-range land use designation for the over 100. acres from CEC, Community Employment Center, and SRR, Semi-Rural Residential, to CEC with a Center of Community Overlay and with an expanded study area. These changes would allow Stanley Martin build 329 townhomes, 63 single-family homes and 400,000 square feet of commercial space and an elementary school. The properties in the development will be connected to public water from supplied by Prince William Public Service Authority and with surface water as the source supply. So, there will be no increase in the use of groundwater in the immediate area.

The Kline Farm property encompasses a bit more than 100 acres and is generally located south and southeast of the intersection of Prince William Parkway and Liberia Avenue, and north of Buckhall Road. The property is located in a transitional area of the county that is adjacent to the City of Manassas. North of the site and across the Prince William Parkway is the Prince William Commerce Center, still under development and will contain mixed retail/commercial/office uses, as well as the suburban residential neighborhood of Arrowood and the semi-rural residential neighborhood of Hyson Knolls to the northeast. East and southeast of the site is semi-rural residential communities and A-1 zoned property. To the west and northwest is the City of Manassas with existing retail service/commercial strip development. Southwest of the subject site is existing suburban residential development.

There are important environment concerns that need to be considered. Residents within the abutting Hynson Knolls community, homeowners bordering Buckhall Road and homes along Lake Jackson Drive rely on private wells for water and septic systems for wastewater disposal. In a “Preliminary Hydrogeological Assessment-Klein Site” prepared by SES/TrueNorth they do a preliminary look at whether the development of the site is likely to have an adverse impact on surrounding private wells and septic systems. The properties in the development will be connected to public water from supplied by Prince William Public Service Authority and with surface water as the source supply. So, there will be no increase in the use of groundwater in the immediate area.

The consultants only reviewed the existing well construction records dating back about 40 years when Hynson Knolls was first developed; existing published hydrology and geology work by the U.S. Geological Survey dating to 1990 and earlier; development of a theoretical groundwater budget and a fracture trace analysis of a 1978 photograph to determining the general flow of groundwater. No physical testing of the aquifer was performed and no recent data records were used.

Private wells draw their water from groundwater. Geology, climate, weather, land use and many other factors determine the quality and quantity of the groundwater available. Within Prince William County Virginia there are four distinct geologic provinces: (1) the Blue Ridge, (2) the Culpeper Basin, (3) the Piedmont, and (4) the Coastal Plain. The U.S. Geological Survey divides the four geologic provinces of the county into seven hydrogeologic groups based on the presence and movement of the ground water calling them groups: A, B, B1, C, D, E and F. About 27 years ago the U.S. Geological Survey studied the groundwater systems within Prince William County. You can review that report if you wish to see the entirety it is by Nelms and Brokman.

The consultants for Stanley Martin Homes identify the site as located within Hydrogeological Group E. The Klein Farm and vicinity are within a fractured bedrock aquifer in which groundwater availability and flow are controlled by fractures and joints within the rock. Hydrogeologic group E consists of metasedimentary, meta-volcanic, and other metamorphic rocks. Rocks within hydrogeologic group E tend to have poor to moderate water-bearing potential, and thin- to thick cover of overburden. Ground-water storage tends to be predominantly in the overburden which is typically relatively granular and porous. This is a water table aquifer separate from but hydraulically connected to the underlying bedrock aquifer. According to that USGS report by Nelms and Brockman, some of the poorest yielding wells are located in hydrogeologic group E.

The fracture trace analysis performed by Stanley Martin Homes consultant found a predominant west-northwest to east-southeast regional fracture orientation; however, there was a notable but less prominent southwest to northeast regional fracture orientation also present. The groundwater flow in Prince William county is generally to the east-southeast, but there is considerable variation and surprises in the flow as documented by monitoring at several cleanup sites in the county and suggested by the fracture analysis.

In developing the theoretical groundwater budget the Stanley Martin Homes consultant assumed that the groundwater recharge rate for the site was equivalent to the average groundwater recharge for Prince William County. This is unlikely to be true. Not only does the geology vary across the county with different water bearing and storage potential in the different hydrogeologic groups, but Prince William county is over 52% open space, including the Prince William Forest Park, the Manassas Battlefield Park, Quantico, and the Rural Crescent.

It appears that the USGS studies that determined an “average recharge” was based on took place at Cedar Run and Broad Run, not characteristic of the hydrogeologic group underlying Klein property and adjacent area. It is unlikely that this site in its current state recharges at the “average recharge rate for the County” and the actual recharge rate of groundwater underlying adjacent to this site needs to be determined.

Flux estimates of components of the hydrologic cycle can be made by creating a water budget in which the various components must balance. Such a water balance approach can be reasonably accurate when all of the terms in the budget can be calculated or reasonable estimated. This approach is appropriate for the scale of the entire Commonwealth, but not on a smaller scale like the Kline property and adjoining neighborhood. On a small local scale these estimates are not at all accurate or appropriate methods of determining groundwater adequacy or impact. Most accurate methods used to estimate recharge are highly dependent on local measurements in both space and time (Healy and Scanlon, 2010) this would need to be done for the Kline property and the surrounding neighborhoods to provide a high level of certainty that the availability, quality and sustainability of groundwater supplying the adjacent neighborhood wells would not be impacted .

This information is necessary to ensure that the neighbor’s water supply will not be impacted over time by the development. If the county comprehensive plan and zoning amendments go through it is essential that the neighbors be assured that their groundwater supply will be adequate to serve their wells into the future and not be depleted slowly over time.

Stanley Martin Homes has proffered to engage an environmental professional to perform a well yield and limited water quality test on any lawfully operating household water supply well for residential property located within 800 feet from the Kline property line to establish a baseline for the closest wells. Those well owners may request a re-evaluation of their well if a negative impact is suspected. If the impact is confirmed by the reevaluation then there is a procedure for the homeowner to request one of three forms of resolution within 30 days; repairing the well, drilling a new well or connecting the home to the public water system.

Sounds good; however, 800 feet which is effectively the first line of homes may not include enough area to ensure no impact. The U.S. EPA standard for determining impact is a much greater radius typically including 2.0 miles for class II a groundwater under the EPA’s Groundwater Protection Strategy. The scope to testing should be defined and include all primary and secondary contaminants regulated under the Safe Drinking Water Act. Finally, 30 days is too short to determine if a well can be repaired, identify and permit a new well site with the County Public Health Department , or determine if the home can be or should be connected to the public water supply. In addition, depletion of groundwater can be a very slow but real process and it might take years for homeowners to notice impact to their wells.

There are other concerns. There is a gas station planned for the development within 600 feet of a private drinking water well. To prevent fuel contamination of the aquifer the Sheets gas station planned for the Kline property development should have secondary containment, constant monitoring, double walled piping, tank and dispenser sumps to prevent leaks and spills and contain on the property any releases. If any of the other commercial sites or the school site will have underground fuel tanks they should be similarly equipped.

The Prince William County Watershed Management Branch found that the proposed amendment to the comprehensive plan and rezoning would negatively impact the protection of environment resources. They stated that retaining the SRR long range land use “will achieve notably greater preservation of existing land features, less impervious area and greater protection of environmental resources.” Mitigation of this impact needs to be included in the proposal for the site.

Finally, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, EPA, mandated a contamination limit called the TMDL (total maximum daily load for nutrient contamination and sediment) to restore the Chesapeake Bay and its watershed. About half of the 39,490 square mile land area of Virginia is drained by the creeks, streams and rivers that comprise the Chesapeake Bay watershed, including all of Prince William County.

This TMDL limits discharge of nitrogen, phosphorus and sediment from waste water treatment plants, agricultural operations, urban and suburban runoff, wastewater facilities, septic systems, air pollution and other sources in the county. To achieve this goal Virginia developed a remediation plan acceptable to the EPA called a Watershed Implementation Plan (WIP). We have reached the halfway point in the program and the EPA will evaluate the plan, goals and require a revision to meet the mandated targets. At the last evaluation point Virginia (including Prince William County) was notified that “EPA will maintain enhanced oversight for Virginia urban/suburban stormwater and will continue to monitor Virginia’s progress in closing the nutrients and sediment gap in the 2016-2017 milestone period.”

The increased nitrogen, phosphorus and sediment that will result from the change in use of the Kline property needs to calculated and accounted for. The impact of the Kline property development on the TMDL needs to be mitigated in another way if the Comprehensive plan and zoning are amended.

Thursday, November 2, 2017

Emergency Disinfection of Your Well after the Flooding

Severe flooding can cause septic waste and even chemicals from cars and factories can enter groundwater making it unsafe to drink for days or even months depending on the extent of contamination and flow rate of groundwater. Essentially, the water will have to clear itself through natural attenuation (filtering by the soil and the contamination moving with the flow of the groundwater). A well may not be a safe source of water after the flood, but in all likelihood it will recover. Often all you need to do is flush the well then disinfect it.
Be aware that waste water from malfunctioning septic tanks or chemicals seeping into the ground can contaminate the groundwater for several weeks if there was significant flooding.  The first thing you need to do is respond to any immediate problems and then test the water periodically to verify the continued safety of drinking water.

Unless your well was submerged near a trucking depot, gas station or other industrial or commercial source of chemicals it is likely that torrential rains or flood waters have infiltrated your well and you have “dirty or brownish” water from surface infiltration. This is especially true if you do not have a sanitary cap on your well or have a well pit. Historically, it was common practice to construct a large diameter pit around a small diameter well. The pit was intended to provide convenient access to underground water line connections below the frost line. Unfortunately, wells pits tend to be unsanitary because they literally invite drainage into the well creating a contamination hazard to the water well system. It is most likely if your yard was flooded or your well submerged that you have some surface infiltration of water. In that case, chlorine shocking your well should disinfect your well and last at least 7-10 days.

If your water is brown, the first thing you should do is run your hoses (away from your septic system and down slope from your well) to clear the well. Run it for an hour or so and see if it runs clear. If not let it rest for 8-12 hours and run the hoses again. Several cycles should clear the well. What we are doing is pumping out any infiltration in the well area and letting the groundwater carry any contamination away from your well. In all likelihood the well will clear of obvious discoloration. Then it is time to disinfect your well. This is an emergency procedure that will kill any bacteria for 7 to 10 days.
After 10 days you need to test your well for bacteria to make sure that it is safe. Testing the well for bacteria would determine if the water were safe to drink. A bacteria test checks for the presence of total coliform bacteria and fecal coliform bacteria. These bacteria are not normally present in deeper groundwater sources. They are associated with warm-blooded animals, so they are normally found in surface water and in shallow groundwater (less than 20-40 feet deep). Most bacteria (with the exception of fecal and e-coli) are not harmful to humans, but are used as indicators of the safety of the water.

To disinfect a well you will need common unscented household bleach.  For a typical 6 inch diameter well you need 2 cups of regular laundry bleach for each 100 foot of well depth to achieve about 200 parts per million chlorine concentration. You will also need rubber gloves, old clothes and protective glasses to protect you from the inevitable splashes, and don't forget a bucket to mix  bleach with water to wash the well cap.
  •        Put on the old clothes and safety glasses
  •        Run your hoses from the house to the well
  •        Fill bucket with half water and half chlorine. 
  •        Turn off power to the well
  •        Drain the hot water tank
  •        Remove well cap
  •        Clean well cap with chlorine and water solution and place in clean plastic bag
  •        Clean well casing top and well cap base using brush dipped in chlorine water
  •        Pull wires in the well aside if they are blocking the top of the well and clean them with a rag dipped in chlorine water mixture. Make sure there are no nicks or cuts in the wires. 
  •        Put the funnel in the well top and pour in the chlorine and water mixture
  •        Now pour in the rest of the chlorine SLOWLY to minimize splashing
  •       Go back to the basement and turn the power to the well back on
  •        Turn on the hose and put it in the well 
  •        Sit down and wait for about 45 minutes or an hour
  •        After 45 minutes test the well to make sure that the chlorine is well mixed
  •        Use the hose to wash down the inside of the well casing
  •        Turn off the hose
  •        Carefully bolt the well cap back in place
  •        Now go back into the house
  •        Fill your hot water heater with water
  •        Draw water to every faucet in the house until it tests positive for chlorine then flush all your toilets. Turn off your ice maker. 
  •        Then do not use the water for 12-24 hours 
  •        Set up your hoses to run to a gravel area or non-sensitive drainage area. The chlorine will damage plants 

After 16 hours turn on the hoses leave them to run for the next 6-12 hours. The time is dependent on the depth of the well and the recharge rate. Deeper wells with a faster recharge rate take longer. If you cannot run your well dry and it recharges faster than the hoses use water you will need to keep diluting the chlorine. If you can run your well dry, you might have to let it recharge and run the water off again to clear the chlorine.

       After about 6 hours of running the hoses begin testing the water coming out of the hose for chlorine. Keep running the hose and testing the chlorine until the chlorine tests below about 1 ppm.
  •        Drain the hot water heater again, open the valve to refill it and turn it back on
  •        Open each faucet in the house (one at a time) and let run it until the water tested free of chlorine. Be aware the hot water will sputter- big time- until all the air is out of the system. Flush all the toilets
  •        Change the refrigerator filter cartridge and dump all your ice and turn your ice maker back on. 

It is important not to drink, cook, bath or wash with this water during the time period it contains high amounts of chlorine whose by products are a carcinogen. Run the water until there is no longer a chlorine odor. Turn the water off. The system should now be disinfected, and you can now use the water for 7 to 10 days when the effects of the disinfection wear off. Hopefully, a single disinfection will be enough. 

Unlike public water systems, private systems are entirely unregulated; consequently, the well testing, and treatment are the voluntary responsibility of the homeowner. Virginia Master Well Owner Network (VAMWON). volunteers can help simplify understanding the components of a well and private drinking water system. The VAMWON volunteers and agents can provide information and resource links for private well owners and inform Virginians dependent on private water systems about water testing, water treatment, and system maintenance. You can find help in Virginia  or my contact information through this link by entering Prince William County or my name in the search box. I am happy to answer emails.

Monday, October 30, 2017

Farming in America

The “Farm Bill” is coming up for renewal. For the uninformed and that is most of us, the Agricultural Act of 2014 (2014 Farm Bill) is made up of 12 titles governing a wide range of food- and agriculture-related policy areas and impacts the food we eat, hunger in America, and the health of our lands and waterways. The Congressional Budget Office said that the total cost of the last Farm Bill would be $489 billion over its 5 year life (2014-2018). That is almost $98 billion a year.

from USDA
 Nutrition programs, the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, or SNAP – which provides direct assistance to households classified as food insecure account for more than 80% of this total, with outlays for crop insurance, conservation, and food commodities representing the other 20%. For some reason, all the political noise and debate is focused on the less than $20 billion in subsidies the farm bill provides to farmers and ranchers.

That is because the Farm Bill matters. The Farm Bill impacts everything about our food system: what crops get subsidized, how much foods cost, how land is used. Though the bulk of the dollars ensures low-income Americans have enough to eat, the Farm Bill determines what is available for all of us to eat. Yet few of us understand what is in the bill and how it works. Though I deal with conservation programs, I am among the many.

According to Marion Nestle a former Professor, of Nutrition, Food Studies, and Public Health, at New York University, from which she recently retired, 80% of farm subsidies go to corn, grains and soy oil, dairy gets 3%, livestock: 2%, fruits and vegetables: get less than 1%, tobacco 2%, and cotton: 13%. Dr. Nestle is the author of Food Politics: How the Food Industry Influences Nutrition and Health and Safe Food: The Politics of Food Safety as well as 6 other really worthwhile books. The little know farm bill has been at the center of American politics for several generations.

The American political system is divided by urban and rural regionalism. Many of the world views that separate us have more to do with whether we live in urban or rural areas than anything else. This has been true since the 1960’s, but it seems much more stark now and our divisions are greater than ever before. The joining of SNAP (food stamps) and agricultural subsidies and programs ensures that Congress can muster enough votes to pass both farm supports and SNAP which might not pass as bills on their own. A bit of politics in the 1960’s has successfully brought us all together to hate and support the the farm bill.

The Farm Bill and its implications are a mess. The Department of Agriculture farm crop insurance, conservation, research and outreach essential to our food system and the survival of family farms; and the assistance to households classified as food insecure are both essential. According to a 2015 White House fact sheet, SNAP helps about 46 million low-income Americans put food on the table. Eliminating hunger in the United States is a moral imperative for our nation.

We were once a nation of farmers, today there are about 2,062,000 farms in the United States. Of these farms 89.7% are classified as small family farms, 6.1% are midsize family farms, 2.9% are large family farms and only  1.3% are non-family farms. Ninety percent of farms are small, and these farms accounted for 48% of the land operated by farms in 2015, but account for only 24% of food production. Large million-dollar farms accounted for half of farm production in 2015, up from a third in 1991.

Nevertheless, small family farms accounted for 57% of poultry and 52% of hay production. Family farms of various types together accounted for 98.7% of farms and 89% of production in 2015. Since 1991, agricultural production has shifted to million-dollar farms both family and non-family farms.

Despite the image carried by most people, farm households in general are not low income when compared with all U.S. households and U.S. households with a self-employed head. Median household income for farmers is higher for each size of farm category than median income for all U.S. households in 2015 ($51,700).
from USDA

Thursday, October 26, 2017

Nearby Development can Impact Wells

Traditional development practices cover large areas of the ground with impervious surfaces such as roads, driveways, sidewalks and buildings. This is especially true for higher density and mixed use developments. This kind of development impacts the groundwater beneath the development and in the surrounding area. These paved and impervious surfaces prevent rainwater from infiltrating into the ground, causing it to run off site at velocities and volumes that are much higher than would naturally occur. According to data from the U.S. EPA, when development disturbs more than 10% of the natural land by covering surfaces with roads, driveways, walkways, patios, and homes the natural hydrology of the land is disturbed, irreparably disturbed. It may take months or even years before the impact to the aquifer becomes obvious as water resources are depleted. Rainfall cannot soak through these hard surfaces and recharge the groundwater; instead the rain water flows across the pavement picking up pollutants along the way. The storm water flows into ditches or storm drains, which typically dump the water, pollutants and debris carried in the stormwater into our streams and waterways and increasing the pollutants in the steams and rivers.

Groundwater is water beneath the surface of the earth. It is one of our nation's most important natural resources and is often taken for granted. According to the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) 24.7% of the domestic water supply in Virginia comes from groundwater- 195 million gallons a day. Groundwater is the sole source of drinking water for the population who are not connected to city or community water systems.

The water level in the aquifer that supplies a well does not always stay the same. Droughts, seasonal variations in rainfall, and pumping affect the level of the water table. If a well is pumped at a faster rate than the aquifer around it is recharged by precipitation or other underground flow, then water levels in the well can fall. This is what happens during times of drought and in depleted aquifers in the summer when there is little or no rain.

But there are other forces that can impact the recharge of a well. Land use changes that significantly increase impervious cover and stormwater velocity can prevent water from soaking into the earth and reduce recharge of the groundwater making existing wells more susceptible to drought and overtime reducing the amount of groundwater. Significant increases in groundwater use for irrigation of crops or playing fields, or commercial purposes can overtax and aquifer and dry out neighboring wells. Unless there is an earthquake or other geological event groundwater changes are not abrupt and problems with water supply tend to happen slowly as demand increases with construction and recharge is impacted by adding paved roads, driveways, houses and other impervious surfaces.

The water level in a groundwater wells naturally fluctuates during the year and this tends to mask a slowly decreasing aquifer or falling groundwater level. Groundwater levels tend to be highest in the early spring after winter snowmelt and spring rainfall when the groundwater is recharged. Groundwater levels begin to fall in May and typically continue to decline during summer as plants and trees use the available shallow groundwater to grow and streamflow draws water. Natural groundwater levels usually reach their lowest point in late September or October when fall rains begin to recharge the groundwater again so it is hard to see a slow and gradual loss of an aquifer even if you monitor the groundwater level. However, unless the groundwater level falls below the pump level it is typically unnoticed. It is essential for the long term sustainability of our communities that the long term impact to the aquifer be assessed before the surrounding land use is changed or developments are approved.