Protecting Water at the Source | Civil Eats

Protecting Water at the Source

One of the big challenges facing the globe in the next century will be access to clean water.

In America, federal agriculture policies are putting drinking water used by millions of people at risk. Perverse incentives such as farm subsidies and ethanol mandates have ushered in an era of fencerow-to-fencerow planting of chemical-intensive commodity crops, even as funding to protect water sources has been repeatedly slashed.

The result is that water running off poorly managed fields that have been treated with chemical fertilizers and manure is loaded with nitrogen and phosphorus, two potent pollutants that set off a cascade of harmful consequences.

Troubled Waters, a new Environmental Working Group report released on April 12, examines the water pollution caused by farm runoff in the upper Midwest and demonstrates that treating the problem after the fact is increasingly expensive, difficult and, if current trends continue, ultimately unsustainable. Because most farm operations are exempt from the requirements of the federal Clean Water Act and states have little authority to compel farmers to control water contamination, the burden of cleaning up agricultural pollution in drinking water falls mostly on municipal treatment systems – and the taxpayers who pay for them.

The city of Des Moines, Iowa has one of the largest water treatment plants in the world to clean agricultural pollution. Toledo, Ohio, estimates that it costs an extra $2,000-to-$3,000 a day just to deal with agricultural pollutants in the city’s water. USDA economists calculate that the cost of removing nitrate alone from drinking water is more than $4.8 billion a year nationwide. The capital costs alone of a system to treat water fouled by nutrient-fueled blooms of algae and the cyanotoxins they can produce can total $12 million to $56 million for a town of 100,000 people.

Taxpayers end up paying twice, once for the subsidies that encourage all-out production and again for the cleanup. Meanwhile, farm businesses reap year after year of high income and federal subsidies whether they are protecting or polluting drinking water.

The health risks of tainted water are severe. Infants who drink water with high nitrate levels can develop a life-threatening blood disorder called blue baby syndrome, and in adults nitrate increases the risk of thyroid cancer and other illnesses. The toxins produced by blooms of cyanobacteria (blue-green algae) can be deadly to pets, livestock, wildlife–and people.

Many American farmers are responsible stewards of land and water. But the list of drinking water sources and water bodies imperiled by agricultural pollution grows daily and now includes the Chesapeake Bay, the Great Lakes and the Gulf of Mexico. U.S. Department of Agriculture researchers say fertilizer use on two-thirds of the nation’s agricultural land does not conform to science-based best management practices. Growers spread too much, spread it at the wrong times and use methods that are prone to losing nutrients into runoff. In addition, installation of “tile drainage,” which is common across the Midwest, promotes the movement of nutrients into streams.

We’ll bring the news to you.

Get the weekly Civil Eats newsletter, delivered to your inbox.

Restoring a strong conservation title in the reauthorized farm bill now being drafted in Congress is the best non-regulatory approach to protect drinking water sources. Congress must also bring crop and revenue insurance programs back under the decades-old conservation compact that required farmers to use good conservation practices in return for a taxpayer-funded safety net.

Most Americans are in line with this thinking. A 2011 Packard poll found that 69 percent of those responding said that reducing use of agricultural chemicals that contribute to water pollution should be a top priority. A significant majority–57 percent–was against cutting funding for farm conservation programs. And 60 percent said farmers should be required to meet environmental standards–such as protecting water quality or soil health–as a condition of receiving federal farm program payments and subsidized crop insurance. That number jumped to 65 percent in the six biggest corn ethanol-producing states.

EWG senior scientist Olga Naidenko PhD, lead author of the Troubled Waters report, was clear about what needs to happen next:

The only solution to preserve clean water is to tackle the problem of polluted agricultural runoff at the source.

Photo: Dirty water by Shutterstock

Today’s food system is complex.

Invest in nonprofit journalism that tells the whole story.

Don Carr has worked on and off for EWG since 2007, helping to reform policy and raise awareness about food, farming and environmental issues. He’s also written on a wide range of topics for Grist, FERN, Politico, Washington, D.C.’s City Paper, Civil Eats, and HuffPost. Before joining EWG, Carr worked in rural politics as a communications director for the Democratic National Committee. Read more >

Like the story?
Join the conversation.

  1. pjnoir
    TOO many corporate large single crop farmers too often pick the lazy way to farm, especially if the right way effects the bottom line.

    Support your local small farmer whenever yopu can.
  2. Year after year of high income? Really? One of the charts on that USDA page you linked to shows projected median farm houshold income to be $55,131 (up a whopping 1.8%) and $55,805 for 2012, the bulk of that from OFF FARM income. I think it's disingenuous at best to cast that as high income from farming. Maybe high income from what ever other job(s) the family's members are holding, but not from farming.

    As someone who makes her whole income from farming, I take offense at your statements.

More from




Alaska’s Climate-Driven Fisheries Collapse Is Devastating Indigenous Communities

An Alaskan king crab trap and fishing vessel.

Farmers March for Urgent Climate Action in DC

The Rally for Resilience marches to the U.S. Capitol building. Signs at the front read

How the Long Shadow of Racism at USDA Impacts Black Farmers in Arkansas—and Beyond

Arkansas farmer Clem Edmonds sits on his riding mower in Cotton Plant, Arkansas. (Photo by Wesley Brown)

After Centuries of Exploitation, Will Indigenous Communities in Biodiversity Hotspots Finally Get Their Due?

Sailing in a wooden boat on the Amazon river in Peru. An indigenous girl sitting on the front of the boat whilst sailing down the river.