5/13/08 * C-Ville Weekly [
full story]
Critics say dredging can work, but a good number is hard to find
Flashback to 2005: After the worst drought on record and a whole lot of talk (and some misguided action) going back 30 years, it looked like there was a plan to expand the water supply that actually would work and satisfy a host of interests—developers who wanted water for the future, advocates who wanted better streamflows for aquatic critters, regulators who needed laws upheld, and ethicists and environmentalists who thought it best to use water from our watershed instead of drinking from the James River.
To top it off, the idea was brought up by a citizen at a public meeting, not from some bigbucks consultant. “Since it was such a simple idea, I thought someone else must have thought of it,” said Ridge Schuyler, Piedmont Program director at The Nature Conservancy, who was instrumental in conceiving the breakthrough component—a pipeline connecting the South Fork Rivanna Reservoir to the Ragged Mountain Reservoir. The Rivanna Water and Sewer Authority (RWSA) bought into the $143 million plan, which would provide for 2055 water demands and restore streamflows in the Moormans River. It was passed unanimously by City Council and the Board of Supervisors, cheered by regulators and environmentalists alike.
Ridge Schuyler, Piedmont Program director at The Nature Conservancy, first proposed the key pipeline feature of the water supply plan. “I think that the benefit that the community is going to get out of this whole process is that it has refocused people on the need to do some maintenance dredging at South Fork,” says Schuyler.
But some people have stopped cheering. At first, it was a handful of people, many with interests in either protecting the Ragged Mountain Reservoir as is or in stalling water supply expansion in order to check local growth. Then The Hook, a local weekly that had largely stayed away from reporting on the water supply plan, published a series of articles that depicted dredging as an alternative water supply solution that was intentionally undermined by local officials, consultants and The Nature Conservancy. Though the reporting was rife with comparisons that oversimplified the cost of long term dredging and overplayed the environmental and monetary impacts of the current plan, the coverage stirred up local concern, particularly among those who didn’t follow the water supply planning in 2005 and 2006.
Hence a three-hour City Council work session on May 6 in order to dredge up a lot of old issues before Council votes in June on increased water rates, which are expected to rise only gradually the first five years because of the water supply plan, but more dramatically after that.
Jeff Werner of the Piedmont Environmental Council knows most of the issues being raised in 2008 about the 50-year water supply plan—because he raised them in 2005, when fighting the idea of building a pipeline from the James River. But Werner stands by the current plan.
Recent Comments