Great Lakes Article:

Lake Michigan advocate says conservation can meet local need
Waukesha still needs additional lake water access, Duchniak says
By Dennis Shook
GM Today, Milwaukee Freeman Newspapers
Published September 28th, 2004

WAUKESHA -
If Waukesha County suburbs simply rethink the way they use their water resource, they would not have to worry about accessing Lake Michigan water.

So said Cameron Davis, executive director for the Lake Michigan Federation, in an interview with The Freeman on Monday. And Davis will say as much today when he testifies at a public comment session in West Allis being sponsored by the state Department of Natural Resources.

The forum is to get public input on a proposed new set of rules governing Great Lakes water use, called Annex 2001.

But Davis said even if the rules do change within the next few years, conservation measures will be needed to prevent using the resource too quickly.

"People need to think of their communities as having a water budget," Davis said in an interview. He said that budget should not just consider how the area can access more water but what it can do to make better use of the water to which it already has access.

Davis said some measures are more obvious than others:

* Don’t water lawns at noon on hot summer days or when a rainfall is imminent.

* Reduce the amount of impervious surfaces that cause water to run off and not be retained, such as roads and parking lots.

* Plan development in such a way that it maximizes water usage.

* Remove dams wherever possible.

* Don’t allow for new development unless there is a sufficient water supply to serve it.

Rules needed

Davis said communities in Waukesha County should be in favor of stringent rules on water use because there are no current rules. For instance, any one of the eight governmental entities that control Great Lakes water through the Council of Great Lakes Governors has the power to veto extending water to any new communities.

But the proposed new compact would mean just a simple majority would be needed to extend water to places that need it, like Waukesha County.

Waukesha and many adjacent county communities need water, as their supply has been dwindling with the steady drop of the aquifer which holds the county’s natural water supply. And as municipal wells are dug even deeper, the water contamination from radium has also increased. Waukesha is under an order from the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency to be in compliance with its radium standards by Dec. 6, 2006. As a short term answer, the city is drilling some other wells and hopes to blend new and old supplies to meet the compliance standard.

Water utility manager Dan Duchniak said Monday water conservation is always a good idea.

"But we have way too much of a need for water for conservation scenarios alone to help," Duchniak said. "We’re at the point where the (underground water) aquifer simply cannot sustain the withdrawal that all the county communities are making."

Duchniak has made the argument that Waukesha should be considered part of the Great Lakes basin and should not be denied water from that source in any event. He said about 40 percent of Waukesha groundwater recharges the Great Lakes by seeping into the aquifer and returning to the Great Lakes.

So he believes it is not really a diversion of water from the system, as the proposal has historically been treated. Duchniak said it can be shown that there would be no need for an expensive system to return water to Milwaukee even though Waukesha is located west of the subcontinental divide because Waukesha groundwater seeps back into the Great Lakes basin.

If Waukesha can successfully make that argument, that could make Milwaukee water even more attractive as a long-term solution to Waukesha’s water problem of having too high a rate of radium.

"You have to look at the Great Lakes as an entire system," Duchniak said. "People get too caught up in return flow issue."

Duchniak said the Fox River and countless wetland areas will also suffer if the water drawn from Lake Michigan has to be sent back to Lake Michigan. It would also be an expensive task because it would have to be returned in an already treated form in pipelines that would have to be constructed.

Waukesha’s problem

Duchniak said recently that in the next eight to 10 years, the city will need to find an alternate water supply and those costs range from $44 million to $77 million.

Depending on how much gaining the supply costs, it could double, or even triple, current rates, he said.

If the city is forced to try to simply use existing supplies and treat them, the increase in household water bills could be from the current average of $196 per year to $440 per year, he estimated recently.

But Davis said the Great Lakes are not an inexhaustible resource, even if they are the largest body of freshwater in the nation.

"We have to protect the Great Lakes as a source of recreation and drinking water for the generations yet to come," Davis said.

Milwaukee Mayor Tom Barrett told The Freeman shortly after he was elected that he would be willing to consider selling water to Waukesha County in return for sharing in the economic growth it might encourage.

Dennis A. Shook can be reached at dshook@conleynet.com.