A WATER MANAGEMENT MODEL FOR

BOTANIC GARDENS AND ARBORETA

by

Harry P. Lynch

A thesis submitted to the Faculty of the University of Delaware in partial fulfilment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Science in Public Horticulture Administration May 1992

Copyright 1992 Harry P. Lynch TABLE OF CONTENTS

LIST OF TABLES vi

ABSTRACT vii

Chapter

1. INTRODUCTION 1

2. Water Management .•.•.•••...•.•• 7 A. Water Resources Planning and Pricing 7 A.1. sustainable Development Based Planning •..•••••.•••.• 9 A.2. Water Pricing Comparison •••••• 11 B. Overview of Water Pricing History in the united states ••.•.•.•••••••• 12 C. Water Resources Management 15 C.1. Traditional Water Conservation Measures ..••••••.• 16 C.2. Innovative Conservation Measures 16 D. The Need for Institutional Water Conservation Measures .•••• 17 D.1. New York City's Water Management Approach • • • . • • • 19

3. WATER MANAGEMENT MODEL ..• ••• 25 A. Level I - Water Management Planning Process 26 A.1. Water Conservation Management Task Force •••... 28 A.2. Water Management Policy 30 A. 3. Water System Audit 32 A.4. Garden site Maps .•• 36 A.5. Water System Audit Assessment 37 A.5.1. Disaggregated Water Demand Forecast ••••• ••• 39 A.5.2. Questions Answered by the Water Audit Assessment •••••• 40 A.6. Research ••••.••••••••• 42 A.7. Technical Water Information Synthesis 45

iii iv A.8. Water Conservation Management Plan Development . . . • . . . • 45 A.8.1. Water Monitoring Committee 47 A.8.2. Problem Assessment Committee 48 A.8.3. Water Conservation Response Committee •.••..•••. 48 A.9. Development of Water Conservation Management Plan Evaluation criteria 49 A.10 Water Management Plan Implementation 51 B. Level II - Interim Water Conservation Management Action Programs • • • • • • • 52 B.1. Administration Water Conservation Education •..••.••••• 53 B.2. Prioritize Water Conservation ••. 53 B.3. staff Water Conservation Education 54 B.4. Retrofitting ...•.••.. 54 B.5. Pressure Reduction ••.•••. 55 B.6. Additional Interim Conservation Measures •••.•.•••••• 56 B.7. Weather Monitoring •••.••• 58 C. Level III - System Specific Water Conservation Management Action Programs 58 C.1. Domestic System .••. 59 C.1.1. Short Term Conservation Measures ..• • 59 C.1.1.1. Monitoring The Water System •••••• 60 C.1.1.2. Training and Education 61 C.1.1.3. Preventive Maintenance 63 C.1.1.4. Reducing Water Use 66 C.1.2. Long Term Conservation Measures •••••••• 67 C.1.2.1. System Improvements 68 C.1.2.2. Water Reuse and Recycling 70 C.1.2.3. Monitoring Wells ••• 71 C.2. Irrigation System •.••••• 72 C.2.1. Short Term Management Changes 73 C.2.1.1. Staff Training •••• 76 C.2.2. Long Term Management Changes 78 C.2.2.1. Water Sources Development ••••• 78 C.2.2.2. Distribution and Delivery System •••• 81 C.2.2.3. Water Reuse and Recycling 83 C.2.2.4. Xeriscape 83 C.3. Wastewater System 84 C.3.1. Short Term Management Changes 85 v

C.3.2. Long Term Management Changes 85 C.3.2.1. Conventional On-site Septic System Alternatives and Improvements •••.. 87 C.3.2.2. Innovative and Alternative Measures For Wastewater Treatment Plants •.• 90 C.4. Conclusion 93

4. CONCLUSION 98

BIBLIOGRAPHY 102

APPENDIX A: Glossary 109 APPENDIX B: Recommended Uses of Meters by Classification •••••. 121 APPENDIX C: List of Materials Which Can be Used for staff Education and Training • •. 124 APPENDIX D: Leak Losses for Boles, Joints, , Cracks Under Different Pressures . • • 126

APPENDIX E: Leak Detection Equipment 128 APPENDIX F: Vendors and Manufactures of Water saving Devices •.• ••• 130 APPENDIX G: Wilbur D. May Arboretum and Botanical Garden Fundamentals of Xeriscape •.• 135 APPENDIX H: Innovative and Alternative Onsite Sewage Disposal ••••••••••••••• 143

APPENDIX I: Solar Aquatic septage Treatment System 146

APPENDIX J: List of Gardens, Institutions, and Water Agencies Contacted and/or Visited During Research Period •••.•••.• 153

APPENDIX K: The How, What, and Where of Water 156 LIST OF TABLES

Table 2.1 Selected Country Average Municipal Water Cost, 1986 ....•.•. 12 Table 2.2 Selected Country Municipal Domestic Water Use . .• ••..•. 13

Table 2.3 Effects of Metering on Canadian Municipal Water Pumpage ... 21

Table 3.1 Ten-step Water Conservation Management Planning Process • • . . 27

Table 3.2 Tasks in a Water Audit 33

Table 3.3 Water Supply Work Sheet 35

Table 3.4 Sources for Historic Water Data 44 Table 3.5 Interim Conservation Actions for Botanic Gardens and Arboreta .... 57

vi ABSTRACT

Many botanic gardens and arboreta across the united states currently face significant operational obstacles due to water related problems. However, all public horticultural facilities in this country potentially face water operational and water supply related problems in the near future. These problems are caused by combined effects of diminishing sources of water supply, increased demands for water from all segments of society, increased development costs, capital shortages, government fiscal restraint, pollution, periodic weather induced shortages, growing public concern for the environment, stress on system equipment, and water quality degradation.

Due to these problems, the cost of providing and using water in public gardens will increase, whether directly, through user fee increases, or indirectly, due to increasing costs of complying with changing government regulations.

Because of increasing costs the National Arboretum in

Washington, D.C. is investigating new sources for their irrigation water supply. Currently, their supply comes from

vii viii District of Columbia's municipal water system, which

significantly, increased service rates to them. Filoli

Gardens, near San Francisco, California has recently completed an extensive domestic and irrigation water system expansion and upgrade. This undertaking was initiated to deal with rising costs, operational inefficiency, and to offset the effects of continuing regional water shortages.

Many gardens across the country are becoming aware of their

own water problems and are looking for ways to address them.

The development of this water management model is in

response to the obvious need to conserve and efficiently utilize water. The model is organized into three levels: water management planning process, interim water management

action programs, and system specific water management action programs. The first level identifies steps and processes an institution must take to develop, implement, and evaluate a water conservation management program. Levels two and three identify interim management measures, as well as short and

long term water system specific conservation measures. When

followed, the model will result in an achievable conservation management plan. Additionally, the model provides examples of proven efficient management techniques and methods, as well as innovative new approaches to solving many current water problems. CHAPTER 1

INTRODUCTION

We are reminded daily that most of our valued natural resources are not limitless and increasingly expensive to develop.' Fresh water is one of those resources. In the united states, population growth, increasing use of water in agriculture and industry, and rising requirements for energy are contributing to greater demands on both the quantity and quality of fresh water supplies. The united states, in fact, is facing critical water shortages particularly in the west and in older cities. This is attributable to rapid population growth, environmental damage, the public trust doctrine, groundwater pollution and drought.2

Many botanic gardens and arboreta across the united states currently face significant operational obstacles due to water related problems. However, all public horticultural facilities in this country potentially could face significant operational and supply related problems in the near future. These problems are caused by the combined effects of diminishing sources of water supply, increased

1 2 demands for water from all segments of society, increased development costs, capital shortages, government fiscal restraint, polluted water, periodic weather induced shortages, growing public concern for the environment, stress on system equipment, and water quality degradation.

All of these pressures are the result of one fundamental fact: namely, water resource scarcities are growing in frequency and severity as economic development continues.3 All of us, including public horticultural facilities, must begin to manage water resources more efficiently. This resource will become more expensive to obtain and utilize for many reasons, among which is the increasing cost of power to pump, move and treat the water. Another reason is the cost for testing and complying with the Safe Drinking Water Act. Amendments to this Act are changing annually as the Environmental Protection Agency establishes new standards.4

To address these problems, water managers in all levels of government are currently developing and implementing new conservation based management techniques designed to reduce the demand for water, improve its efficient use, and reduce losses and waste. 3

Every area of the country has special circumstances affecting its water supply and demands. Consequently, water authority-induced management plans will vary from one area to another. All, however, are considering one common new technique, that of water demand management. The demand management approach will serve to complement more traditional supply management techniques that are still required to manage water effectively. Accurate pricing is the fundamental new option which demand management will afford water management authorities. This will have an elevating impact on fees charged water consumers directly and indirectly.5

Water demand management is a strategy that encourages increasing flexibility in planning and decision making by taking systematic account of various socioeconomic and political parameters, as well as more traditional physical factors. It encompasses not only water quantity, but also water quality by casting new perspectives on waste discharge and pOllution.6

Today there are few fields more dependent on a reliable quantity and quality of water than public horticulture.

However, like most institutions in the united states, botanic gardens and arboreta appear to have taken clean, 4 safe, inexpensive water for granted and consequently, are managing it poorly.

This water management model for botanic gardens and

arboreta outlines actions a public horticultural facility should take in order to limit adverse effects growing water

problems will have on them. The issues, rationale, and responses which should be considered in developing an

institutional water management plan are its subject.

This thesis has been prepared to help botanic gardens and arboreta (1) assess their current water situation, (2)

develop a water conservation management plan, (3) identify

and monitor important aspects of their water system, (4) and

efficiently manage the institution's water supply and

demand. Appendix K reviews water development history and its importance to humans, its current regulations in the United states, current problems, and its use in botanic

gardens and arboreta. For readers unfamiliar with these issues appendix K is recommended reading prior to the

thesis. The thesis first addresses water management,

planning, and pricing prior to detailing the water management model. 5

What is proposed in this three level model is a process, with accompanying rationale, which public garden decision makers can follow to develop and implement plans which will improve water conservation. The model contains more than just the essential ingredients for a management plan. Level one is the framework of the plan and presents the principal steps in the planning process. Level two and three present detailed examples of interim, short term, and long term management actions which are both innovative and proven successful. The approaches advocated by this water management model broadens water management options available to public horticultural institutions. 6

Endnotes: Chapter 1

1. E. Brabec, Save Water, Save Maintenance, Save Money; a Guide to Planning and Designing Water-Conserving Landscapes, (Anne Arundel County, MD: Department of utilities, 1989), p.4.

2. L.W. Owen and W.R. Mills Jr., California's Orange County Water District: A Model For Comprehensive Water Resources Management, (Water Resources Planning and Management and Urban Water Resources, Proceedings of the 18th Annual Conference and Symposium, 1991), p.1.

3. D.M. Tate, Water Demand Management in Canada: A State-of- the-Art Review, (Ottawa, Canada: Inland Waters Directorate, Water Planning and Management Branch, 1990), p.1.

4. D.C. Yaeck , Executive Director of the Chester County Water Resources Authority, (May 28, 1991), personal interview.

5. Ibid.

6. D.M. Tate, Water Demand Management in Canada: A state-of- the-Art Review, (Ottawa, Canada: Inland Waters Directorate, Water Planning and Management Branch, 1990), p.1. CHAPTER 2

WATER MANAGEMENT

A. Water Resources Planning and Pricing

Increasing demand, uneven distribution, pollution, resource depletion, weather induced shortages, increasing costs of development and treatment are all problems currently affecting water quantity and quality. All too often, however, the only time communities and their leaders are aware of these problems is during times of shortage. Conservation or wise use of water should be practiced at all times, specifically because competition for water among various users is becoming more and more complex.

Conservation and efficient use of this country's water resources, has become the goal for water resources planners.

There is a perception that large quantities of high quality water are limitless. Believing this as fact, water has been provided for agriculture, industry, energy production, and municipal use at essentially zero cost. It

7 8 should not be surprising then that water, like all other resources, has been exploited.

The reason for this underpricing of water in all sectors of the United states has its roots in water services pricing by the federal government. Prior to recognizing that this resource was scarce and valuable, the federal government provided water project funding at a fixed cost recovery rate. The original reason for federally funded water projects was the value of these public works endeavors to provide economic development and western expansion. The problem is that the group or groups they serve and fees charged are set by law for fifty years or more.' This system has been described as analogous to setting up a buggy factory in 1906 and keeping it in business unchanged for 50-

100 years.

Water problems in the united states are currently felt by every sector of the economy, from municipal water supply to navigation. Increasing development costs, capital shortages, government fiscal restraint, diminishing sources of water supply, polluted water, and a growing concern for the environment is forcing water managers to begin to rethink traditional approaches to water planning and pricing. 9

All of these pressures are the result of one fundamental fact: resource scarcities are growing in number and severity. Water resources are only the most recent of our natural resource scarcities to be recognized. Research conducted in 1973, however, demonstrates that society is capable of meeting these scarcities, but only through market

incentives; specifically, the increase in cost of the resource.2

A.1. sustainable Develo~ment Based Planninq

sustainable development as a planning policy is being called for in the united States, as well as by the united

Nations, which introduced the concept in the 1980's with the preparation of the World Conservation strategy.3 In order for sustainable development to occur, monetary incentives and disincentives will be called upon for more efficient use of natural resources. This type of water demand policy supports sustainable development principals. The concept of sustainable development is summarized as:

the modification of the biosphere and the application of human, financial, living and non- living resources to satisfy human needs and improve the quality of human life. For development to be sustainable it must take account of social and ecological factors, as well as economic ones; of the living and non-living resource base; and of the long term as well as the short term advantages and disadvantages of alternative actions.4 10 The sustainable development concept was an attempt to answer critics of the conservation movement, who maintained that conservationists were, by definition, against resource development.

Understanding this, a water manager's current aim is to promote better water use practices through increasing conservation and development of water resource sustainability. Realistic water pricing is central to proposed policy changes. Kenneth D. Fredrick, a Senior

Fellow at Resources for the Future, made the following statement: Americans take low-cost, high-quality water for granted. While three-fourths of New York City's water is not even metered, most Europeans pay from 50 percent to 350 percent more for water than we. This helps to explain why they use as little as one-quarter as much water as we do for the same municipal purposes.5 Old ways of thinking about allocation and costs of water are being challenged, resulting in a change in the way we develop and use water in this country.6 According to

Sandra Postel, Vise President for Research, at the

Worldwatch Institute: Only by managing water demand, rather than ceaselessly striving to meet it, is there hOfe for a truly secure and sustainable water future. 11

We live in an era of limits, although water in this country has been managed with a policy of presumption, laws, and institutions which do not reflect a recognition of these limits. Abel Wolman, Professor Emeritus, Johns Hopkins University, school of Geography and Environmental Engineering, considered a world expert on water supply and the father of modern sanitary engineering, was quoted in the

New York Times on August 9, 1981, as saying:

Water is cheaper than dirt. That means there is no orderly design as to when and where to use it. In a vast country such as ours we have never been able to organize a thoughtful, logical national plan. One does not have to be an economist to see the problem of underpricing. Common sense tells us that people waste commodities that they do not value highly, or commodities that, though valued highly, are supplied cheaply.8

A.2. Water pricinq Comparison

Both in the Southwestern United states, where water shortages are permanent and predicted to worsen, and in the

Northeast, where shortages are periodic and predicted to worsen, water prices are extremely low. In the United States the price of water is approximately half what it is in Europe9 (see Table 2.1, p.12). Municipal water in Frankfurt, Germany, costs approximately $3.73 per thousand gallons, whereas in Los Angeles, which is significantly more arid than Frankfurt, the cost is only $0.75 per thousand 12 gallons.1o This disparity in prices is reflected in the sharp contrast in rates of consumption between the u.s. and Europe (see Table 2.2, p.13). In Los Angeles, on average

180 gallons of water per person per day is consumed; in

Frankfurt, the average amount is 40 gallons per person per day.11 Even where water is least plentiful in the U.S., prices rarely reflect supply. Prices are lowest where water supplies are lowest: $0.53 in El Paso and $0.59 in Albuquerque, compared with $1.78 in Philadelphia and $1.72 in New York city. 12

Table 2.113 Selected country Average Municipal Water Costs, 1986

Country Cost ($/1000 gallons)

United states 1.25 Canada .94 Sweden 2.00 united Kingdom 2.00 West Germany 3.75 France 2.82

B. Overview of Water pricinq Historv in the united states In order to understand water price discrepancy in the united States, it is necessary first to understand U.S. western expansion and government water subsidies. Prior to

1870, John Wesley Powell, the famous western explorer, described the Western united States, the area beyond the 13 hundredth meridian, as the Great American Desert. But to a developing post civil War united states the region between the Atlantic and Pacific coasts was an area rich for development. Horace Greeley, the publisher of the New York

Herald Tribune, published the famous words "Go west, young man" a phrase which galvanized this development. Ultimately it was railroad expansion fueled by governmental desire to have a transportation link between coasts which created mass settlement of this region. The government funded this enormous railroad development by deeding the railroads massive tracks of land as a way for them to raise capital to pay back guaranteed governmental loans. The railroads in turn sold or gave land to prospective farmers throughout this country and around the world.

Table 2.214 Selected Country Municipal Domestic Water Use

Average consumption Country per-person per-day (gal)

united states 120 Canada 95 Sweden 53 united Kingdom 53 West Germany 40 France 40 14

Additional governmental encouragement to settle the west was found in the original Homestead Act of 1862, which essentially provided anyone willing to farm in the west, one hundred and sixty acres. However, because there is not enough natural rainfall in this region to support agriculture the U.S. Government was also forced to create agencies, such as the Bureau of Reclamation and Army Corp of

Engineers in order to develop regional irrigation and potable water resources.

In order for western agriculture to provide sustainable employment, farmers have to earn enough from their crops and live stock to support their families. This is not possible if they have to pay full cost for Department of Reclamation irrigation water projects. The price of their crops would be to high to compete on the open market with crops grown in other regions of the country. This is the main reason water in arid regions of the west is less expensive than areas with plentiful water resources. The united states government through its water development agencies subsidies the majority of water provided in western states. In 1982, Kenneth D. Fredrick, a Senior Fellow at Resources for the Future, stated:

that for all Bureau of Reclamation projects, government water subsidies total, on average, at least $500 per acre over the life of a project. 15

Thus, for a 160-acre farm, the subsidy might total $80,000, and in some water - short regions it could be as high as $286,000.15

Until recently, a 160-acre farm was the largest eligible for federally subsidized water under the 1902 Reclamation Act.

A recent amendment to the act raised the ceiling to 960 acres. For the largest farms now eligible, the subsidy can rise to between $480,000 and $1,715,510.

The price of agricultural irrigation water in the u.s. ranges between about $0.009 and $0.09 per thousand gallons, federal subsidies make up the difference between price and cost. In eighteen western federal irrigation projects that the U.s. department of the Interior studied in 1980, the government was providing between 57 and 97 percent of the cost over the lifetimes of the projects.16

c. Water Resources Manaqement Water management is the task of selecting specific actions from among a range of available alternatives for meeting water demands. In other words, every institutional water resource problem offers a number of possible solutions, with effective management being the art of choosing the best solution for the institution from among these possibilities.17 Water conservation is the ultimate goal of water management. For this work, water conservation 16

is defined as the socially beneficial reduction of water use

or water loss. 18

Surface and ground water managers in their planning process will seek to achieve efficient allocation of water resources among competing agricultural, municipal, and

industrial users. In areas of the country experiencing episodes of drought or limited supply, many technical,

legal, public relations, and economic problems exist for water managers. They must devise plans for decreasing quantity demand while conserving supply sources and quality, preventing or at least diminishing the threat of water shortages.

C.l. Traditional Water Conservation Measures

Traditionally, water managers have used a combination of programs of persuasion to encourage reduced water consumption. These programs are usually designed in a public relations format, featuring conservation education. If these efforts fail, explicit restrictions on certain water usage is implemented; restrictions on washing cars, watering the lawn, irrigating gardens, etc •.

C.2. Innovative Conservation Measures

The use of market incentives to promote both surface and groundwater water conservation for all users is highly 17 recommended by many water authorities.19 Basic economic principles hold that to achieve an efficient allocation of resources, the price of the resource must equal its marginal cost. The marginal cost of water resources is the cost of capital and operating inputs, as well as cost of extraction and a scarcity value.20 Traditionally, the legal and institutional pricing of water utilities requires "non- profit" operation, interpreted to require setting prices no higher than the average extraction cost, ignoring any development or scarcity cost of providing this resource.

The need to price water at its marginal cost rather than its traditional average cost has been recognized by water management authorities. It has become increasingly difficult for these federal, state, and local governmental authorities to provide water service at subsidized rates.

To meet increasing demand, as well as to maintain and develop infrastructural resources, the users of water will be charged more for this service in order to conserve it.21

D. The Need for Institutional Water Conservation Measures Institutional developmental planning traditionally accounts for needed water resources. Typically this included fresh water supply, irrigation, and waste disposal. Due to the many problems related to this resource, future 18 planning will have to take into consideration additional direct and indirect costs, including the cost of power produced with it, and the effects drought and flood conditions will have on fees charged for it.

The benefits of implementing water conservation concepts throughout a water supply service area are many and should be carefully examined. Saving water will save energy, which in turn, will save money on water and heating bills for consumers as well as on municipal energy pumping costs. Demand for water has a pronounced impact on the environment by lowering stream flows and lake levels, depleting groundwater aquifers, and in certain cases, requiring the impoundment of free-flowing streams or the diversion of water from one basin to another. Reducing per capita water use will decrease the amount of wastewater generated, thereby maintaining the operating efficiency of treatment plants over a longer period of time. Reducing water consumption will delay costly capital improvements to water systems which typically involve expansion of water treatment or pumping plants and storage facilities. When compared to the costs of expanding existing facilities or developing new water supply sources, the most cost effective alternative is conservation. 19

0.1. New York City's Water Manaqement Approach

Water conservation, also known as water demand management, is recognized by New York City as the most efficient and cost effective manner to meeting growing demand problems. Presently, water consumption averages 1.5 billion gallons daily. Since 1969, water demand has grown

1.1 percent annually, to an average per capita daily usage of 208 gallons. This is attributed to many factors, including population growth, increase in water consuming processes, deterioration in plumbing infrastructure with consequential leak losses, and lack of conservation by consumers because of flat rate water pricing. New York

City's supply system is currently having to supply water needs exceeding system design by almost twenty-five percent, and average per capita usage continues to grow.22

New supply source projects are considered too costly in time and money to be the key response to New York's excessive demand.23 New York City has undertaken, through governmental legislation, many steps to reduce its water demand. Because residential water use accounts for 63 percent of daily consumption, legislation mandates that all new construction or substantial rehabilitation projects must incorporate low-flow (3.5 gallons per flush) toilets. City

Law #29, passed in April of 1989, mandates the use of ultra 20 low-flow (1.6 gallons per flush) toilets in all new or substantially remolded facilities commencing January 1992.

City Law #53, in effect now, requires that all new and substantially rehabilitated properties be metered. In 1987, the city embarked on the nation's largest Universal Metering

Program, whose object over a ten year period is to install

630,000 meters in all of the city's residential premises.24

Historically, consumption decreases 10-30 percent upon meter installation. The customer is billed on a volume-base rate, paying for actual water consumption, rather than billed on a flat rate basis.25 Table 2.3 cites experiences of several

Canadian municipalities which moved from a unmetered system to one which was metered (see Table 2.3, p.21). The figures indicated are total water use, not just domestic.

New York City has also introduced free residential water audits. These in-home auditors will prepare water saving plans, and calculate potential annual water savings in terms of both volume and dollar savings. Additionally this program provides no-charge installation of low-flow showerhead fixtures and faucet aerators to homeowners.26

In 1989, New York initiated a door-to-door survey to control waste at the residential and small commercial user

level. Nonrecorded water loss, mainly in the form of leaks, 21

is responsible for nine percent of the city's usage. A leaking faucet can waste as much as 3600 gallons per day. with this door-to-door survey, an attempt is made to inspect

each apartment/unit within a district, and each fixture therein is checked for leaks. Notices of warning are served on those with leaking fixtures, giving them a certain period to correct the problem. More than 2.8 million gallons per day to date is saved with this program.27

Table 2.328 Effects of Metering on Canadian Municipal Water Pumpaqe

Pre-metering pumpage Post-metering pumpage

Short term Long term

Per capita-day Per capita-day Change Per capita-day Change Municipality (gal) (gal) (%) (gal) (%)

Kingston, Ont. 264 168 36 197 25 Brockville, Ont. 234 198 15 Ottawa, Ont. 157 114 27 Calgary, Alta. 309 211 31

Aggressive detection of street leaks is also part of New York City'S program. The current leak detection program uses sophisticated sonar leak detection equipment to survey approximately nine million linear feet of underground pipes annually. Hard to detect leaks and potential water main breaks are found this way before they become disruptive. This program is responsible for saving more than 25 million gallons per day.~ 22 The water industry faces the same key issue questions that the energy supply industry faced: can demand best be managed by increasing supply through capital projects or by conservation? Common sense dictates that conservation, through a wide array of measures including appropriate pricing, will be incorporated by all water managers.

Clearly, demand management can produce huge and significant results. Conservation efforts are almost always a fraction of the cost of capital efforts and are therefore prudent and cost effective actions to take. Managing demand to better control levels of consumption makes sense for the consumer, the utility, the municipality, and the environ- ment. 23

Endnotes: Chapter 2

1. R.M. North, "pricing Policy for Water Services," Water Resources Planning and Development, Jerry L. Anderson (ed) , (New York: American Society of civil Engineers, 1991), p.374.

2. H.J. Barnett, and M.C. Morse. Scarcity and Growth: The Economics of Natural Resources Availabili ty, (Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 1973).

3. Anonymous Author, World Conservation Strategy, (Gland, switzerland: International Union for Conservation of Nature and Natural Resources, 1980), p.1.

4. Ibid.

5. Anonymous Author, "Keeping U. S. Well From Going Dry; Study Says Higher Water Prices Are Needed," Chicago Tribune, March 2, 1986, p.c9.

6. D. C. Yaeck, Executi ve Director of the Chester County Water Resource Authority, (May 28, 1991), personal interview.

7. S. Postel, conserving Water: The Untapped Alternative, Paper 67, (Washington DC: Worldwatch Institute 1985), p.7.

8. P. Rogers, "The Future of Water," The Atlantic Monthly, July, 1983, pp.97-98.

9. D.M. Tate, Water Demand Management in Canada: A State-of- the-Art Review, Social Science series NO.23, (ottawa, Canada: Inland Waters Directorate, 1990), p.13.

10. Ibid.

11. P. Rogers, "The Future of Water," The Atlantic Monthly, July, 1983, p.99.

12. Ibid.

13. D.M. Tate, Water Demand Management in Canada: A State-of- the-Art Review, Social Science series NO.23, (ottawa, Canada: Inland Waters Directorate, 1990), p.13.

14 • S. Postel, "Conserving Water: The Untapped Al ternati ve, •• Paper 67, (Washington, DC: Worldwatch Institute, 1985), p.40. 24

15. Anonymous Author, "Keeping u. S. Well From Going Dry; study Says Higher Water Prices Are Needed," Chicago Tribune, March 2, 1986, p.c9.

16. P. Rogers, liThe Future of Water," The Atlantic Monthly, July, 1983, pp.97-98.

17. D.M. Tate, Water Demand Management in Canada: A state-of- the-Art Review, Social Science Series No.23, (ottawa, Canada: Inland Waters Directorate, 1990), p.4.

18. D.D. Baumann, J.J. Boland, and J .H. Sims, The Problem of Defining Water Conservation, (Victoria, British Columbia: The Cornett Papers, University of Victoria, 1980), pp.125-134.

19. D.J. Rosa, "Water Pricing to Achieve Efficient Allocation Among Competing Users," Water Resources Planning and Management, Jerry L. Anderson, (ed), (New York: American Society of civil Engineers, 1991), pp.376-377.

20. Ibid.

21. Ibid.

22. S.F. Ostrega, "Demand Management in New York City," Water Resource Planning and Development, Jerry L. Anderson (ed), (New York: American Society of civil Engineers, 1991), pp.663- 664.

23. Ibid.

24. Ibid.

25. Ibid.

26. Ibid.

27. Ibid. p.666.

28. D.M. Tate, Water Demand Management in Canada: A state-of- the-Art Review, Social Science Series No.23, (ottawa, Canada: Inland Waters Directorate, 1990), p.18.

29. Ibid. CHAPTER 3

WATER MANAGEMENT HODEL

This management model has been prepared after conducting an extensive literature search and visiting public horticultural institutions throughout the united

states and reviewing their water management practices. Additionally, state water managers, their pumping, treating, and wastewater disposal facilities were contacted and/or visited; their water policies as well as those of river basin authorities were reviewed. This work is designed to provide public gardens with assistance necessary in designing an effective water management conservation plan. In addition, this model identifies innovative and alternative methods for conserving water.

Every institution has special circumstances affecting

its water supply and demands. An appropriate plan for one garden or arboretum might differ from that of another. Careful consideration must be given to methods which will benefit a particular garden and its water systems. Despite these differences, the planning method and total quality

25 26 management ideas introduced by this model should be of value to all.

This model has been organized into three levels: water management planning process, interim water management action programs, and system specific water management action programs. The first level identifies the steps and processes an institution must take to develop, implement, and evaluate a water conservation management program. Level two and three identify interim management actions, as well as short and long term water system specific conservation management actions. The later two levels are designed to be utilized by an institution which is formulating a specific water conservation management plan as identified in level one.

A. Level I Water Management Plannina Process

The development of a water management plan for botanic gardens and arboreta is presented in a ten steps process (see Table 3.1, page 27). This process is flexible to easily adapt to various geographic regions with widely different water supply characteristics and water management problems. Seven steps involve mustering necessary resources to initiate development of a conservation plan. Continuous evaluation and updating of procedures included in this 27 process are required by an institution, in order to assure responsive planning for its needs.

Table 3.1 Ten-step Water Conservation Management Planning Process

(step 1) Appointment of Water Conservation Management Task Force

(step 2) statement of Water Management Policy and Plan Objectives

(step 3) Audit of Existing Water System

(step 4) Development of an Institutional site Map

(step 5) Audit Assessment

(step 6) Identification of Research Needs

(step 7) Synthesis of Scientific and Policy Issues

(step 8) Development of Water Conservation Management Plan

(step 9) Development of Water Conservation Management Plan Evaluation Criteria

(step 10) Implementation of Water Conservation Management Plan 28

A.l. Water Conservation Management Task Force step 1: The planning process is initiated through

appointment of a water conservation management task force

(WCMTF). The WCMTF has two responsibilities. First, during plan development, WCMTF will supervise and coordinate development of the plan. Second, after the plan is implemented and during management activity, WCMTF will assume the role of policy coordinator; reviewing and

recommending alternative options if needed to the

institution's director and\or governing body. The WCMTF will be accountable for the success or failure of the management plan. The role of the WCMTF will be referred to

throughout discussion of the ten-step planning process.

Water conservation management task force will be most

effective if members are selected by the executive director at the request of the board of trustees. WCMTF should include representatives from all departments and all levels of the institution. Task force makeup should recognize the

multidisciplinary nature of water management and its impact

on an institution. At time of appointment the executive

director must establish a general time table for the WCMTF to accomplish its responsibilities. A paid water conservation expert will help with the development of this time table and serving as a consultant, is a desirable 29 addition to the committee. Care must be taken to keep membership small so that the task force size does not become in itself a constraint or impediment to completion of the process.

At time of appointment of the water conservation management task force, two pivotal decisions rest with the executive director. First, who will provide leadership for the activity? The person chosen must coordinate development and implementation of the plan. Second, what department will assume primary responsibility for plan administration after implementation? The person selected for leadership should have the executive director's complete confidence. The chairperson should have a demonstrated ability to coordinate complex activities in an unbiased manner. In addition, a broad understanding of water management issues and an appreciation of the development process so that all plan components receive adequate attention in their proper sequence is needed.

It is often desirable that the chairperson be from the department which will also assume responsibility for ultimate plan administration. However, because of different management styles this may not and should not be the case for all institutions. 30

It is primarily important for the WCMTF to prepare, as part of the planning process, a working water conservation operations manual. This manual must state the institution's water policy, the specific amount of water and/or costs which will be conserved, include an inventory of existing water systems, identify interim water conservation actions

and system specific conservation action programs, the related costs, and a timetable for completion of each step.

In addition, an inventory of technical organizations, governmental agencies, their principal contacts, and phone numbers should be included as a source for future reference.

A.2. Water Management Policy

step 2: As their first official action, the WCMTF will develop a water management policy that reflects the general water conservation direction the board of trustees has indicated for the institution. The policy statement is typically centered around desired realization of the

following water needs:' * increased ability to handle emergencies such as drought, mechanical failures or water contamination;

* variable cost savings in energy and chemicals from reduced production, treatment, and consumption;

* deferment of expenditures for expansion of water supplies or wastewater treatment facilities by allowing an existing water supplies and/or wastewater treatment system to serve increasing demand; 31

* greater efficiency and increased capacity in wastewater treatment facilities;

* improved in-stream flows in source waters and related water resources and higher quality in wastewater receiving discharge;

This policy statement when complete should be reviewed and endorsed by the board of trustees. Next, the WCMTF will need to identify specific plan objectives. The plan will have to relate to specific budgetary savings and clearly state this in the policy, if it is to be taken seriously. When completed, the task force must review the statement of policy and determine if they are clearly stated and achievable. At times throughout the life of the task force, these objectives may need to be restated. It is imperative that the plan contain an institutional assessment monitoring procedure and a response component to any foreseeable problems.

Water conservation management objectives will vary among institutions depending primarily on their geographic location. Institutional water management objectives, therefore, should reflect the unique physical and environmental characteristics affecting them. 32

A.3. Water system Audit

step 3: A water system audit is a thorough inventory and examination of the accuracy and efficiency of an existing water system and control equipment. The overall goal of this step is to identify, quantify, and verify water losses and the consequential expense. This audit must first identify and quantify all water sources, type of distribution system or systems, current water uses, efficiency of operation, and any necessary improvements.

Included should be information concerning daily and annual water consumption, storage capabilities, wastewater treatment or discharge system, and known problems, such as inadequate pressure or leaking underground pipes.

Water losses, whether due to leakage or faulty system controls, represent monetary losses. This is water the institution has already paid to obtain, treat, and pressurize. However, because it is lost there has been nothing produced with it or gained from its use. Table 3.2, page 33, outlines water resource audit steps the WCMTF must take in order to identify unproductive elements in the institution's water supply system. 33

Table 3.2 Tasks in a Water Audit

Task 1. Identify all water sources and age of service

Task 2. Identify water distribution systems and age (domestic and irrigation) Task 3. Identify all water storage facilities, capacity, and age

Task 4. Identify all water uses

Task 5. Quantify water from each source: meter readings or pumping estimates

Task 6. Identify potential water losses: Surface water evaporation, leaking water mains, leaking faucets, inefficient use, etc. Task 7. Estimate losses by type

Task 8. Identify all known problems: inadequate pressure, leaking pipes, illegal or inappropriate wastewater discharge, etc.

Key to a successful water resource audit is knowing the volume of water that comes into an institution and how much is used for any given task. In order to quantify water use, all water sources which supply the distribution system must be measured. To accomplish this, these sources must be metered and in most cases are. All elements of the water audit should be consistent in terms of period studied (a 12- month period is recommended) and water units measured. 34

Units can be in thousands or millions of gallons, cubic feet, or acre feet, as long as the unit is clearly identified and consistent.2

For each water source, the following informational record sheet should be developed:

Name of source: Type of source: (well, reservoir, natural surface water body, purchased) Type of measuring device: Identification number of measuring device: Type of recording register: (eg., dial, builder type) Units register indicates: Multiplier (if any): Date of installation: size of conduit: Frequency of testing: Date of last calibration:

A one year record of water supply must be created and totalled. This information will provide base line water use information in addition to indicating seasonal high and low usage rates. This information is valuable for identifying potential water supply and use problems. See Table 3.3, page 35, for an example of a one year water supply work sheet. 35

Table 3.3 Water Supply Work Sheet

Source A Source B Source C Monthly Totals Month Units Units Units Units

January February March April May June July August September October November December

Totals Total supply to the system:

(Note: units equals amount of water; this unit amount varies depending on the type of meter used.)

After totalling supplies, each source meter should be reviewed for accuracy either by reviewing available meter test results or retesting the meter. American Water Works Association standards should be utilized to determine if the meter is properly sized and installed.3

In addition to developing baseline information on metered water supply sources, estimated quantities of all institutional water use must be made. For example, all water used for irrigation and landscaping, heating, cooling, domestic and visitor services, cleaning, decorative fountains and pools, and wastewater treatment need to be 36 compiled. If these areas or tasks are not metered, then portable meters can be used to conduct periodic tests allowing annual water consumption estimates to be developed.

If this is not possible, local water authorities will be able to help an institution develop daily and seasonal water use estimates for a given task or type of water delivery system.4

A.4. Garden site Maps

step 4: Development of site maps. A minimum of two maps need to be developed for the institution, if they do not currently exist. First is a map of the current water distribution system or systems. The purpose of this map is to identify, list, and plot all domestic and irrigation distribution systems supply sources, including interconnections with other systems and intermittent sources or emergency supplies. Choose a different symbol to represent each type of water source: aqueduct turnouts, municipal water hook-ups, wells, and surface diversions such as lakes, streams, and reservoirs. Identify and plot source measuring devices. Additionally, it is important to visit each source location and gather data to construct a table which summarizes information about the measuring device at each source, such as meters, Parshall flumes, weirs, and 37 stream gauges. Identify piping material used, it's size, and age.5

The second map needed is an accurate map of existing gardens or arboreta. Indicated on this map in addition to garden type is plant water needs for each given area (high, medium, low). Soil samples should be taken and soil type and pH included for each area. Topography should also be included. Age of the landscape plantings should be indicated: new landscape, old landscape with mature trees, mixed-age landscape. If possible, future garden development should be identified with complete water needs estimated.6

These two maps are critical for planning improvements for the water systems. They can be created with a computer aided design (CAD) program. A CAD mapping program would facilitate adding and removing information from site maps as changes occur. Additionally, having maps on an accessible computer system will aid in long range planning.

A.5. Water System Audit Assessment

step 5: Water systems audit assessment. This assessment must include economic and technical analysis of current water management as well as water systems capabilities. Costs of providing domestic and irrigation 38 water have to be established. Quantities of overall use must be evaluated for minimum plant needs, both quantity and quality, as well as non-plant institutional needs (domestic needs, visitor needs, heating needs, etc.). Delivery equipment and techniques must be evaluated for efficiency.

Patterns of use, both seasonally and hourly should be developed and analyzed.

One important aspect of a post water audit assessment and one which needs further explanation is water demand forecasting. Conventional forecasting approaches are inadequate for public horticultural institutions; they rely on population and per capita demand projections which merely carry historic trends into the future. Where design, size and timing of additional water supplies, distribution systems, storage capacity, fire protection, etc. depend on forecasted demand, errors will lead to construction of inadequate or non-essential facilities, and excessive economic and environmental cost.7 Additionally, errors will result if forecasting ignores changes in institutional demand, water price, changes in the local economy, and if existing conservation efforts are ignored. 39

A.5.1. Disaggreqated Water Demand Forecast

A more detailed, disaggregated water demand forecast is

an important prerequisite for developing an accurate water demand forecast and effective water conservation measures.8 Disaggregation refers to separation by major water use

sectors. Because different water use sectors respond at different rates to individual conservation measures,

sectoral disaggregation is the only way to evaluate their

effectiveness in relation to the entire system.

Disaggregation can vary from a general breakdown (for example, outdoor irrigation, indoor irrigation, heating, cooling, employee use, visitor use, and fountains) to a very detailed breakdown within more general user categories.

For example, a detailed breakdown of outdoor irrigation use should include daily and seasonal water use in each specific garden and possible various sections of a specific garden.

Additional system detailing should include water use data on specific visitor restrooms, buildings, greenhouses, and other work areas. A greater number of sectors in the disaggregation provides a more flexible, detailed, and accurate water need forecast.

Disaggregation should also include dimensions of water use. Dimensions refer to water flow rates corresponding to 40 specific time conditions. Common dimensions which are important in water supply planning and demand projection are average daily flow, winter seasonal daily flow (this represents primarily indoor use), summer seasonal use (this will help indicate all outdoor use), and peak daily use.9 Dimensional disaggregation is important when determining reduction factors for conservation methods.

Botanic gardens and arboreta, especially those with pending facility expansion, might wish to hire consultants to perform detailed disaggregated demand analyses. A simple disaggregation, facilitated by a water supply audit, can be accomplished internally with less detailed information, and will still considerably assist preparation of a conservation plan.

A.5.2. Questions Answered bv the Water Audit Assessment Once the water audit has been completed, an institution will have sufficient data to determine where current and potential problems exist. This audit assessment will provide information necessary to set water priorities and establish a water development master plan. Evaluations of water system corrective measures should be based on conservation of this resource, costs, feasibility, and savings which result.1o Answering the following questions 41 during an audit assessment will indicate areas of an institutions water system which need corrective action.

* What are the sources of water for your institution? * Do these sources have to be treated and pressurized before distribution?

* Are these current sources of water adequately meeting current demand; including domestic, irrigation, visitor services, heating, cooling, and fire protection?

* What is the age of the current distribution system, including pumps, valves, and wastewater disposal or treatment facilities?

* What is the operational cost of providing water to your institution, including cost of purchase, pumping, treatment, distribution, wastewater treatment and discharge?

* What are maintenance costs of your water systems, including labor and repair cost for broken mains and pipes, valve replacement, irrigation head and filter repair and replacement?

* What are current known problems and estimated costs of these problems?

* Are losses currently occurring within your system?

* How much water is lost in each problem area identified? * What corrective measures are needed to reduce water losses?

* What will be the cost of reducing water losses? * What savings and benefit/cost ratio will result from reducing water losses?

* What are the development plans of the institution and will current water supply meet this development? 42

* What are the development plans for the surrounding community and will this affect current water supply and/or potential future needs? * What is the quality of the current water source, and is this adversely affecting longevity of the distribution system and/or plant maintenance and production? * Are there any pending local, state, or federal legislation which will affect your source of water, ability to distribute it, and ability to discharge it? Answers to these questions will, of course, vary by institution and therefore are not specified. Collecting data needed to answer these questions as well as to complete

Level I of this model will require approximately one year.

Once an institution has conducted a comprehensive water system audit, annual updates will provide data to help managers decide how to adjust priorities and monitor progress made on system maintenance. An update can identify new areas which need attention and allow for establishment of new annual goals. Updating a water audit will be less expensive than doing one over."

A.6. Research

step 6: The purpose of this step is to identify research needed to support water conservation management plan objectives and recommend research projects to help eliminate deficiencies which may exist. It is unlikely that 43

research needs and institutional water system gaps will be

known until various committees formed in association with

the task force have been through the planning process.

In general, this task consists of detailed research

into prevailing water conditions within an institution's specific area. To facilitate future planning, baseline

information is required. Needed information includes, but

is not limited to current and projected regional and local water supplies, drought and water shortage regulations, historic seasonal weather patterns, and current water supply

limitations.

Establishing a working relationship with local

governmental entities who maintain water resource records is vital. These entities will have local networks of precipitation monitoring stations, monitoring wells, and

surface water flow gauging stations. Their expertise, local network of weather monitoring stations, and records will be

valuable for strategic institutional planning. Table 3.4,

page 44, lists additional data types needed and information

sources for them. 12 44

Table 3.4 Sources for Historic Water Data

1. Institutional water use data Water utility

2. Population data County or regional planning agency u.s. Census of Population, Housing 3. Number of households or dwelling units in water resource area County or regional planning agency u.s. Census of Population and Housing 4. Number of connections to the same water source Local Water Utility

5. Climatic data National Weather Service state University Department of Atmospheric Science, Meteorology or Climatology Local utility records

6. Water and wastewater rate structures Local utilities 7. Other economic variables County or regional planning agencies U.s. Census of Population, Housing, Business, Manufacturers

8. Existing water resource policies state plumbing code Local government Local utility 9. Local/regional industry and population Local or regional economic development agency state Department of Labor U.S. Census of Manufacturers U.S. Bureau of Labor statistics

10. Economic variables County or regional planning agency Individual state Department of Labor, Regional Office 45 A.7. Technical Water Information Synthesis

step 7: An essential aspect of this planning process is synthesis of water science and government policies which affect water conservation management. Understanding scientific issues and technical constraints involved in possible water conservation management changes must be outlined and explained. Integration of science and policy during the planning process will research priorities and synthesize current task force understanding. The WCMTF needs to consider various innovative and alternative water management practices. In order to do this, they must have an understanding of science and government policies which will affect their recommendations for development in the management plan.

A.8. Water Conservation Management Plan Development

step 8: Every public garden has special circumstances affecting its water supply and demands. Therefore, a water conservation management plan must be designed based upon information gathered in preceding steps. Careful consideration should be given to methods which would benefit particular water systems.

When designing a water conservation management plan, it is necessary to have an accurate accounting of water demand 46 in order to estimate potential savings. For this reason, the water system audit conducted in step 3 is important. A break down of supplies and demands into all components, followed by a demand projection, is key to an achievable plan.

The goal of the water conservation management plan is to initiate activities which will reduce short and long term demand for water, improve efficiency in use, and reduce losses and waste of water. Short-term conservation measures differ from long-term measures in time of implementation, degree and length of effectiveness, and influence on water supply planning.13 They both differ from interim conservation measures, which are measures capable of conserving water as well as being quickly initiated prior to completion of the water conservation plan. In a nutshell, long term measures are substitutes for new water supplies while short term measures are applied to temporarily fix a long term water problem.

In general, a water conservation management plan should have three primary components: monitoring, problem assessment, and response. The water conservation management task force will have to establish a committee to address 47 each of these components. These three components are discussed below.

A.B.1. Water Monitoring Committee A water monitoring committee must be established to identify current available water and estimate likely future needs. The chairperson of this committee should be a member of the WCMTF; other members should come from current staff members who are familiar with institutional water use. The water monitoring committee will have five primary objectives: (1) identify areas with in the institution where water conservation is possible; (2) develop a water conservation monitoring system; (3) inventory all data collected during water system audit; (4) determine water needs of primary institutional users; (5) develop and/or modify current data and information on institutional water delivery systems. The function of this committee will necessitate close interaction with a second committee which is assessing institutional water problems.

It is important that the water monitoring committee meet regularly to determine progress on their five objectives. The committee must establish a time line for completion of their objectives and WCMTF should be informed of this time line and review committee progress. Following 48 each meeting, reports should be prepared and disseminated to WCMTF members.

A.a.2. Problem Assessment Committee

Times of management change in any organization have far reaching impacts. This is why a second committee must be established to assess current water management problems and determine the impact proposed management changes will have.

This problem assessment committee should be composed of staff members from every department; its chairperson should be a member of the WCMTF. The problem assessment committee should consider both direct and indirect impact of proposed management changes being developed by the WCMTF, as well as long and short term benefits. Following each meeting, reports should be prepared and disseminated to the WCMTF members.

A.a.3. Water Conservation Response Committee

A water conservation response committee comprised of members of the WCMTF will act on information and recommendations provided by the problem assessment committee. During the planning development process the response committee should inventory and evaluate all forms of available, innovative and alternative technologies as well as management activities which will address and minimize wasteful water practices. Management options must 49 be determined for each of the principal problem areas.

Appropriate mitigation measures must be established on three timescales: interim-term, short-term, and long-term. Level II and III of this water management model identify appropriate mitigation measures which can be used by an institution on these three timescales.

Based on findings of the three committees just discussed, the water conservation management task force will develop a management plan. This plan will outline water problem areas, their conservation solutions, what department will be responsible for administering these solutions, how they will be implemented and monitored, timeline, costs for the institution, its impact on production and staff, and its ultimate savings in dollars, water quality and quantity. This plan will be submitted to the executive director for approval and ultimately be passed on to the board of trustees for final approval. This plan will unquestionably require expenditure of capital improvement funds, available only with board approval.

A.9. Development of Water Conservation Management Plan Evaluation Criteria

step 9: The final step in establishment of a water conservation management plan is creation of a detailed set of evaluation criteria. To maximize effectiveness of the 50

plan, two modes of evaluation must be in place: (1) an ongoing or operational evaluation program that considers how changes in new technology, availability of new research

results, and national and local changes in legislation may affect operation of the plan while it is still underway; (2)

post water conservation management changes evaluation

program that documents and critically analyzes plan results.

The first mode of evaluation is intended to keep the water conservation management assessment and response system current and responsive to institutional needs. Following

initial establishment of the plan it should be monitored

routinely by the water monitoring committee to ensure management changes have been implemented and to gather data for evaluation of these changes.

A post water conservation management changes evaluation

should be conducted to assess results of enacted changes and determine if others are still needed. Evaluation should focus on the following: 1. Was the water conservation management plan followed? 2. Were the actions taken and measures implemented effective in mitigating water conservation? Which action measures have been effective and which have not? 51

3. Should additional management action measures be taken? If so, what are these measures, their impact, cost, and savings?

4. What has been the impact of these changes on production and staff work load?

5. What has been the ultimate savings in dollars, water quality, and water quantity?

The post water conservation management program evaluation process may identify numerous new areas which possibly can be exploited to conserve water. Therefore, establishment of the water conservation management task force and its subsequent committees should be viewed as an ongoing institutional management tool for monitoring, assessing, and recommending water conservation measures.

A.10. Water Management Plan Implementation

Step 10: A water conservation management plan should be implemented by the water conservation management task force with announced support of the executive director. The chairperson of WCMTF should be responsible for coordination between departments and contractors for all measures taken under the guidelines of this plan. The WCMTF will need to meet regularly during implementation of the management plan.

This is required to keep the task force informed of plan status and progression towards meeting its timetable and objectives. Additionally, periodic assessment of implemented procedures is necessary in order to formulate 52 needed management plan framework change recommendations, which the executive director and board of trustees will review and either approve or disapprove.

B. Level II - Interim Water Conservation Management Action Proqrams

Level II of this management model consists of only one objective, to recommend and encourage interim water conservation measures which can be used in development of a water conservation management plan. After the existing water system audit has been completed and while additional data is being collected and analyzed, there will be a number of management actions which can be taken to conserve water.

This is exactly what the second level of the model is designed to do: select, develop, and implement management action programs which will immediately assist in reducing water demand, conserving water while more detailed short and long term plans are developed and initiated. These management actions will reduce water waste and encourage conservation awareness while more institutional-specific short and long term improvements can be developed.

Water conservation through demand reduction can be accomplished directly or indirectly within an institution. Direct methods are those which physically suppress demand.

They include changes in plumbing fixtures, pipe insulation 53 to reduce waiting time for hot water to reach the tap, pressure reduction, leak repairs, and landscape changes to make them less water demanding. Indirect methods are those which offer an inducement to reduce water use. In an institution, this is primarily accomplished through staff education and training. staff awareness of supply limitations, efficient water use, and simple conservation techniques will save a significant amount of water.

B.l. Administration Water Conservation Education

The first interim management action which should be taken is for institutional administration to learn more about issues surrounding fresh water supply and quality affecting the garden or arboreta. This can be accomplished by contacting local water authorities, subscribing to news and action letters, reviewing books, films and videos, as well as keeping informed on issue related legislation. This is important so that leaders of the organization can communicate clearly to staff about this issue.

B.2. Prioritize Water Conservation

The next step is announcing to the staff the priority of water conservation and protection. Informing staff of water problems and encouraging feedback from them can lead to conservation in areas management may not expect.

Additionally, formation of a management-line staff committee 54 to research and develop conservation recommendations will encourage personnel unity in addressing this problem.

B.3. Staff Water Conservation Education

Another important water reducing measure can be accomplished through raised awareness of all staff members.

Resources should be allotted for water conservation education, with all employees required to participate.

Appendix (C), page 124, lists information concerning educational resources.

B.4. Retrofittinq

Another interim management measure which should be taken is retrofitting existing plumbing fixtures. Such as adding or replacing them with water-saving fixtures. This sounds expensive, but in reality is not. Retrofitting includes, but is not limited to, installing water-conserving shower heads, shower head flow reducing disks, and faucet aerators. Quality retrofitting kits can be purchased for less than $10.00. Retrofitting also includes repairing toilet tank leaks and placing water displacement devices, such as dams or water filled plastic bags, inside toilet tanks. Residential retrofitting programs around the nation report saving an average of sixteen gallons per person per day.14 Those savings break down as follows: 55

* Low-flow shower heads save approximately 7.2 gallons per person per day.

* Toilet tank dams save an average of one gallon per flush, or 4 gallons per person per day. Toilet tank bags save about 2 gallons per person per day.

* Faucet aerators save an estimated .5 gallons per person per day

* About 20 percent of all toilet tanks leak. Fixing these leaks will save on average 24 gallons per day. Approximately, 4.3 gallons per person per day.15

B.S. Pressure Reduction

Reducing excessive pressure in distribution systems can also save a significant quantity of water. In general, excessive pressures are those above 80 pounds per square inch (psi). Pressures below 80 psi can also be reduced, as long as pressure in any part of the system does not fall below 20 psi and minimum institutional fire flow pressures are maintained. In most areas of a public horticultural facility 50 psi is probably sufficient pressure.16

Reducing pressure decreases leakage, amount of flow through open faucets, and leak-causing stress on pipes and joints. System stress reduction in turn decreases system deterioration, saving long-term repair costs and reducing breakage incidents. Pressure reduction also reduces wear on water using equipment. 17 56

Pressure reducing valves may be installed for individual buildings or garden areas if the entire system's pressure can not be reduced. Water flow rates for a given distribution section are related to the square root of pressure drop. This means for example, reducing pressure from 100 psi to 50 psi would result in about a one-third drop in water flow. A 30 to 40 percent reduction reduces overall demand by about 6 percent.18

B.6. Additional Interim Conservation Measures

Installing hot water pipe insulation will reduce run time before hot water reaches the faucet. This installation is estimated to save between 1 percent and 4 percent of an interior residential water use.19 Replacing worn gaskets or installing washerless faucets will tighten up slow dripping leaks from standard faucets. This will conserve from 20 to 100 gallons per day. Table 3.5, page 57, lists additional conservation actions which can be implemented during the interim phase. 57

Table 3.5 Interim Conservation Actions for Botanic Gardens and Arboreta

* Start a water conservation program * Assign water usage monitors

* Repair leaking plumbing fixtures * Install Ultra Low Flow (ULF) toilets and low flow shower heads in employee restrooms

* Adjust water flows and pressures to save water * Turn off water to rooms, buildings, and areas not in use

* Install recycling system for chilling and cooling towers, as well as pad cooling systems

* Limit continuous flow processes, like fountains and water falls, when possible

* Cover ornamental pools when not in use to reduce evaporation * Wash windows when dirty, not on a regular basis * Instruct cleaning crews to be frugal with water

* Encourage employees to use personal cups at water fountains

* Post water conservation notices near all water sources such as water fountains and sinks

* Sweep shop and work area floors rather than hosing them

* Eliminate cleaning of paved areas with water * Reduce fresh water used for cooling and air conditioning systems, (e.g- raise office air temperatures) * Check water hose couplings weekly for leaks * Install flow restrictors on hoses and faucets

* Ensure that solenoids and valves controlling water flows are completely closed when the water using cycle is off

* Adjust flushometers and automatic flush valves in public restrooms to utilize minimum amount of water necessary * Install automatic faucet turn-off valves in public restrooms

* Adjust irrigation water schedules to minimize evaporation and wind loss, monitor and adjust sprinkler heads to avoid watering sidewalks and streets 58

B.7. Weather Monitoring The final step which should be taken during the interim phase is establishment of a weather monitoring station. An on-site monitoring station capable of measuring temperature, humidity, rainfall, wind speed, barometric pressure, and evapotranspiration rates is important for establishing site specific base line weather information. Monitoring the weather is a key informational source when determining irrigation rates and schedules.20

C. Level III - System Specific Water Conservation Manaqement Action Programs

The goal of this final level of the model is to identify detailed water system conservation and management measures which, when implemented in part or in whole, will use water efficiently. This level is divided into three sections: the domestic water system, irrigation water system, and wastewater system. Each section is further divided into management changes which can be accomplished in the short and long term.

Many measures included in Level III have proven successful with botanic gardens and arboreta, as well as with industrial, manufacturing, and large office sites throughout the united States and other developed nations. 59 They are included here as a source of proven water

conservation techniques which can be used by an institution in development of a water conservation management plan, as described in Level I of this model.

e.l. Domestic System The domestic water system in a public horticultural

facility, for purposes of this document, is that system which supplies potable water, under pressure throughout the facility, for human consumption and sanitary services. Additionally, water from this system mayor may not be used for cooling, heating, cleaning, and irrigation.

C.l.l. Short term Conservation Measures

The first step in conserving domestic water in the short term is a commitment from management. The commitment is demonstrated by:

* Establishing water use as an important criterion for institutional operations.

* Announcing the priority of conservation to all staff.

* Setting conservation goals. * Training personnel. * Allotting resources. * Acknowledging successes.

This commitment and comprehensive institutional involvement gives strength to specific conservation measures. 60

The short term conservation measures described below

are monitoring, training and education, preventive

maintenance, and reducing water use.

C.l.l.l. Monitorinq the Water System. This provides

baseline information about:

* Quantities of overall use.

* Patterns of use (seasonal, hourly).

* Quantities and qualities of water use in individual processes.

This information can be used to set conservation goals and

document results in a sound conservation program. A survey

of water uses and water qualities guides careful selection

of new, innovative, and alternative conservation measures.

Water-use monitoring is also a good way for an

institution to gain staff support for water conservation.

Employees respond to conservation measures better when they

can see results. They become more knowledgeable about water-use problems and how they personally can affect water

use efficiency. Water meters on individual pieces of water-

using equipment or in specific areas of responsibility

provide employees with direct information about how water

efficient they are in their jobs. Similarly, a water manager in charge of a water conservation program can study 61 records of total institutional water use to stay abreast of conservation progress.21

Facility inspections, such as organized checks of pumping equipment, water storage areas, distribution systems, and other water-handling areas, prevent problems from going unnoticed. Daily inspections should be conducted to check for leaks and problems with equipment or water requiring operations. Inspectors should record meter readings and note specific changes in water use on a regular scheduled basis.

C.1.1.2 Traininq and Education. Water conservation training and education of all employees is another important step in short term water conservation. This training should provide employees information on topics such as xeriscaping, low flow devices, irrigation management, and leak detection.

The E.I. duPont de Nemours & Company, Wilmington, Delaware, has stated as part of their corporate policy certain fundamental beliefs about people/employees. Among these are that all employees:

* Want to do a good job, and rise to the expectations placed upon them.

* Want to be informed and expects management to lead by effectively communicating values, boundaries, and guidelines. 62

* Want to be involved, to be needed, and be a valued member of the team. Understanding these fundamental beliefs about the people who

make up the staff of an institution, helps explain why continuous and ongoing water conservation training and

eduction of the staff is so important. with staff training

it will become evident that all members of the staff have

something to offer and may possibly find additional conservation measures not previously considered.22

There are many ways of educating and training staff.

An introductory lecture, including a film or slide show can be presented. A number of films and slide shows are available (see Appendix C, p.124).

In addition to formal training sessions, an employee awareness program should be established. Examples of these

types of employee water conservation education and training measures can be found in private industry. Advanced Micro Devices, Inc. of Santa Clara, California includes water

conservation articles and suggestions placed in their

institutional newsletter. Additionally, information is sometimes issued in memo form along with paychecks. This

information often addresses current water problems and 63 possible solutions which affect the entire community, not just the company.n

National Semiconductor's Santa Clara, California plant places stickers in restrooms, asking employees to help conserve water, as well as widely posting water conservation signs throughout the institution reminding staff to save water. National Semiconductor also listed names and phone numbers of appropriate staff members whom employees should contact regarding water conservation, suggestions, or to report leaks. Supervisors also include discussions on water conservation in their weekly staff meetings and seek input from their staffs on where additional water savings might be attained.~

C.l.l.3. Preventive Maintenance. Establishing a preventive maintenance (PM) program is primarily important for detection and repair of system leaks. Even small leaks, if uncorrected, can waste hundreds of gallons a day. In a domestic system leaking water is that which has been pumped, treated, and therefore paid for. Leakage may also represent water which, if saved, can cancel or postpone the need for a distribution system or supply expansion. 64

All water supply systems leak. Most water supply systems in the u.s. leak 5 to 15 percent of their water; many also exceed this.25 Acceptable leakage will vary from system to system. It has been estimated, however, that older systems will leak between 2500 to 3000 gallons per day per mile of pipe, and that newer systems will lose between

1500 and 2500 gallons per day per mile (see Appendix D, p.126).u

When repairing leaks, it is important to record factors which may have contributed to the leak. This record will make future leak detection, repair, and replacement decisions easier. Causes of leaks and factors affecting leakage rates include:v

* Poor construction methods

* Poor material or old material

* Electrical currents causing pitting

* Ground movement

* Soil characteristics: permeability

* Traffic loading and vibrations

* Internal corrosion - sulphur pitting

* Internal electrical transfer

* External corrosion

* Pressure, either fluctuating or surging

* Age of system 65 The results of the water system audit conducted as part of levell's water conservatio~ management plan will help guide a leak detection oriented, preventive maintenance program. Results of an audit which will be of value include the following:~

* Mains and services - types of pipes in system, ages, diameters, joint types, installation methods, frequency of inspections, leak history, and operating pressure. Where information is incomplete, part of the preventive maintenance plan would be made to improve records.

* Valves - location, types, left - or right - handed, number of turns to exercise valves, how often exercised.

* Hydrants - types, sizes, locations, flushing frequencies, unmetered usage.

* Pressure reducing valves, air release valves, and blowoffs - location, how often they are exercised.

* Distribution system maps - what is shown, how current is the information, how often is the information updated?

In addition to compiling the above mentioned information for a PM program, as part of this plan an attempt should be taken to detect and repair leaks. Detecting leaks which are not buried simply requires inspection. To conduct a detailed leak detection survey including buried portions of the system will require 66 specialized equipment. Equipment for this type of survey includes an electronic sonic detector and a correlator. Electronic leak detectors use a microphone, amplifier, and frequency filters to separate and amplify sounds which leaks make. An indicating meter can provide a more sensitive method of determining the position of maximum sound intensity. 29 Correlators use micro-processor chips and computers to pinpoint a leak between two listening points.3o

Sonic leak detection equipment without a correlator costs from $500 to $2,600. A correlator ranges in cost from $18,000 to $45,000 (see Appendix E, p.128) • Leak detection work often is contracted. Costs for contract work varies from region to region, but is usually based on a per distance of water main surveyed.

Thorough record keeping will help determine effectiveness of a total water system preventive maintenance program. Such record keeping will help manage water systems efficiently and aid decisions on priority system upgrades and repairs.

C.1.1.4. Reducina Water Use. Reducing water use of an institution in the short term is possible where water is 67 used excessively. These reduction measures will vary from institution to institution; however, a variety of methods can be called upon to achieve reductions. Processes can be optimized to require less water. Operations can be modified to reduce water use. Equipment modifications, such as installation of low-flow faucets in employee washrooms and automatic shutoff valves or timers in public restrooms, can result in significant reductions in water use. Simply using less water to do the same job, such as more careful floor washdowns, can reap benefits.

The elements of implementing a water reduction program in the short term are:

1. Evaluate the water quantity required for a given application.

2. Compare the required quantity with actual use to see if current use is excessive. 3. Evaluate alternative equipment or operation options which will conserve water.

C.l.2. Long Term Conservation Measures

Changes made to the domestic system over the long term will be dictated by specific institutional needs, which as previously described, a water system audit will reveal. The following water system changes are recommendations which may or may not apply to every botanic garden and arboreta.

However, they are based on actual changes made by public 68 horticulture facilities or recommendations from public water managers.

C.l.2.1. System Improvements. Improving water quantity and quality are two changes which often require long term planning. with the threat of periodic droughts and increasing demand, having a backup water source is a requirement and not a luxury. A domestic water system supplied by ground water through wells can develop a backup source by drilling additional wells or, if possible, connecting to a municipal water system. Filoli Gardens near San Francisco, California has done just this. Their concern for meeting daily demand as well as increasing their fire protection capability led them to install, at their own expense a one-mile long, eight-inch diameter water main directly to one of San Francisco's reservoirs. This source serves as a back up to their existing three-well system. A facility whose water is supplied solely by a municipal source may be able to back their system up by drilling on- site wells, tapping into the ground water beneath their institution. The National Arboretum in Washington, DC. is considering this to offset their irrigation water use, which is currently supplied from Washington, DC's municipal system at a very high rate, $300,000 to $400,000 annually.31 69

Water quality can be improved by adjusting pH level prior to distribution. Filters can be installed to remove suspended particles, chlorine, and other impurities. Longwood Gardens, located in Kennett Square, Pennsylvania is in the process of installing activated charcoal filters on all of their public water fountains. This is primarily to improve the taste of water provided for public consumption.

The water distribution system can be improved by replacing aged and corroded distribution piping with new and larger piping. Phosphate treatments can be added to water supplies prior to distribution, this will prevent pipe corrosion by providing a protective coating on the inside of existing piping.

Water pressure can be improved by increasing storage capacity. This can be accomplished with a new water tower or additional storage tanks. Increase in storage capacity will lengthen operating life of well pumps, which will not have to run as often or as long to meet demand. Fire protection will be improved. Distribution system damage caused by fluctuating and/or surging water pressure can be eliminated. 70

Fire protection is primarily accomplished with water and is enhanced by a greater storage capability. Accessing an institution's current fire protection capability and if needed upgrading the system, must be part of a long term management plan. This is a critical use of water in an institution that is often overlooked until it is too late.32 Both Longwood Gardens and Filoli Gardens have recently built a new water tower and storage tank, respectively. They did this for several reasons, among them was their understanding the role water has in a fire protection system.

C.l.2.2. Water Reuse and Recycling. Water can be reused for a number of different tasks. Essentially, water reuse is the application of wastewater from one process to a different process. For example, by double piping a building, graywater from drains, showers, and washing processes can be used to flush toilets, and in some instances to irrigate gardens, all processes currently accomplished primarily with treated potable water. Additionally, graywater can be utilized in ground water recharge, completing the natural hydrologic cycle and off- setting ground water withdraws. 71

For many years the University of Arizona has been researching water recycling and reuse. Since 1986 they have been collecting data from a residence in Tucson, Arizona, which was retrofitted with water conserving fixtures, rainwater harvesting capability, evaporative cooling, and a graywater reuse system. During their four year study without any reduction in resident lifestyles, municipal water use was reduced by 66 percent. Graywater reuse accounted for 32 percent of the total household use.33

Cooling is one of the largest water uses in the united states. It is used to cool heat generating equipment, condense gases in a thermodynamic cycle, cool buildings and offices, as well as greenhouse and plant production areas. The most water-intensive cooling method is once-through cooling, where water contacts and lowers temperature of a heat source, then is discharged after only one use. Recycling with recirculating cooling systems dramatically reduces water use by using the same water to perform several cooling duties.

C.1.2.3. Monitorinq Wells. Monitoring wells have been suggested for institutions who supply their own source of water from underlying aquifers. Drilling a series of monitoring wells will enable institutions to truly manage 72 their water resource from the ground up. These types of wells allow access to underlying aquifers in order to collect and test water samples, measure water table height, and track potential pollutants. A simple monitoring well is another tool for efficient water management.~

In addition, establishment of a capital reserve fund is also recommended for institutions which utilize well water exclusively. This fund is needed for unforseen problems, especially rehabilitation of wells and replacement of pumps. The average working life of a production well is only twenty years. After that, well rehabilitation is often required and is quite expensive.~

C.2. Irrigation system

Irrigation water use is by far the largest source of water consumption in botanic gardens and arboreta. According to Wayne Solley of the u.s. Geological Survey, irrigation water accounts for 40 percent of total water used in the united States.~ Consequently, this is an area in which great water reduction can be accomplished.

Outdoor irrigation reduction is frequently targeted by water authorities conservation programs. During periods of drought, restrictions are often placed on landscape 73 watering. In many areas of the country, suburban development, with its consequential landscape development which requires regular watering, have created additional seasonal shortages. By establishing efficient water practices prior to mandatory drought or other water shortage induced restrictions, botanic gardens and arboreta will be more capable of weathering these problems with minimal plant loses. Additionally, efficient irrigation water use will reduce the expense associated with wasting water.

C.2.1. Short Term Management Changes

Short term irrigation management changes which will reduce waste of irrigation water centers on six steps. This six step method has been adapted from the landscape water management program of the state of California, Department of

Water Resources, Office of Water Conservation. Preliminary results of using this six step method in California indicate an average water savings of approximately 20 percent.37

The six steps are as follows:

1. Check and monitor all irrigation equipment.

2. Fix broken equipment.

3. Determine watering rates.

4. Develop an irrigation schedule.

S. Properly set irrigation controller.

6. Fine tune irrigation system. 74

Management in step one involves working closely with gardeners and maintenance personnel to see that irrigation equipment (particularly sprinkler heads) are working properly. Water use in individual gardens should be monitored by metering consumption, as well as observation of sprinkler head patterns, spray trajectories, and particulization, accompanied with system adjustments when needed.

step two requires the establishment of a preventive maintenance program which works with a monitoring plan to fix and repair irrigation equipment. This includes detection and repair of line leaks and broken delivery heads. Additionally, filters and distribution heads must be cleaned and kept clear. Regular spray head adjustment is needed to assure only desired plants are irrigated, at the appropriate rate, and wasteful runoff is not created.

step three requires establishing appropriate watering rates for individual gardens and if possible, individual sections of gardens. Watering rates are determined by setting catch devices in irrigated sections of the garden, running sprinklers for a specified amount of time, and measuring amounts of water collected. Sprinklers are than balanced for equal delivery within an irrigation section. 75

Watering rates are then calculated by taking into account factors which influence evapotranspiration including sunlight, temperature, precipitation, advection (water loss due to heat reflected from surrounding structures), humidity, wind, clouds, and fog. Evapotranspiration (a scientific measure of plant water demand based on weather conditions) and effective rainfall (the fraction of total rainfall which reaches the plant zone) are used in determining these rates. These data can be obtained from local Cooperative Extension Service agents (calibration to local site conditions will be required).~

In step four an irrigation schedule is developed based on watering rates and local average weather data. This schedule must specify how many minutes and time of day to water on a station-by-station basis for each month of the year. These schedules must be adjusted for seasonal and annual weather variations. By utilizing an on-site weather station, an irrigation manager can modify schedules according to site specific weather data. Water resource management computer software has been produced for assisting with proper irrigation scheduling.

step five is the actual setting of irrigation controllers. The controllers should be set and adjusted 76 minimally once a week. Frequency may change based on local weather conditions.

step six is fine tuning the irrigation system. This is accomplished in a number of ways. Good system maintenance and garden employee training is the key to an efficient irrigation system.

In addition to the preventive maintenance measures already mentioned, adding dissolved oxygen to irrigation storage ponds or lakes will discourage algae development, encourage beneficial micro-organisms, and help filter and improve water quality. In-line filters placed at the irrigation water source will help prevent sprinkler head clogging.

C.2.1.1. staff Training. Training gardeners and other staff who utilize irrigation equipment will provide additional system fine tuning. Having water applied to plants when and where it is needed, in a manner which is best for plant uptake, and at a time when it is utilized most efficiently, will conserve water. In addition to training gardeners, managers need to be trained so they are familiar with all irrigation techniques as well as how to manage the entire system. Included in this is the 77 utilization of better well management; specifically, allowing wells to be rested, resulting in a storage capability directly below the well head.39

Improper watering techniques actually result in less healthy plants. For example, weekly long slow watering is more beneficial than daily short watering; the latter encourages shallow root development which is prone to drought stress. Time of day is also an important consideration in minimizing evaporation. During the hottest part of the day, as much as 40 percent of water applied to landscape plantings evaporates without providing any benefit.4o Early morning is the best time to water, specifically between 3 a.m. and 8 a.m. This period has the lowest temperature and calmest winds, and morning sun will dry leaves of excess water, preventing fungal problems.

Watering technique should also be pointed out to staff during training. Fine sprays and high trajectories result in high levels of evaporation; large droplets and low trajectories minimize evaporation. Sprinklers should be placed and/or adjusted to provide even application rates so areas of over watering and under watering are avoided, as well as to avoid watering paved surfaces. Hose meters measure amounts of water used in irrigation and can be set 78 for desired water amounts. This can be used to aid hand watering and use of portable sprinklers. Additionally, taking soil samples to visually determine the amount of soil moisture is another easily taught technique which can help scheduling. Finally, encouraging use of mulch and incorporation of organic material into planting bed soil, will aid water retention and help prevent excessive soil water evaporation.

C.2.2 Long Term Management Chanqes

Irrigation management changes which will require a long term commitment includes modifying existing landscapes and expenditure of capital. A primary long term goal should include improvements of irrigation water sources, and upgrading distribution and application systems. This will require very specific and detailed planning for each individual institution. In order to meet projected future needs as well as to account for existing system losses due to age, water sources have to be upgraded or replaced. Both water quantity and quality improvements must be considered. Quantity of water can be increased through a number of sources, including improved stormwater capture and use, development of new wells, and use of recycled or graywater.

C.2.2.1. Water Sources Development. Stormwater collection and retention is a requirement of most large 79 developed landscapes. Proper management of stormwater can be used to ensure that rainwater will be available to landscape plants. with a few changes in planning, design, and construction, stormwater can provide a reliable and cost-effective reservoir for landscape plants.

At an individual garden, use of a well-designed drainage pattern can increase availability of rainwater for garden plantings. By contouring land so that water flows from building downspouts, paths, sidewalks, and other paved surfaces, recharge areas are developed to make use of even small amounts of rainwater. This system must be designed hand-in-hand with well-drained soils, and collection areas for periods of intense rainfall. Large collection areas will have to be designed with plants which can stand both periods of extended standing water and drought.

The largest amount of stormwater is collected from buildings and parking lots. These sources present the largest problem in a typical institutional landscape, and the usual solution is to provide a series of catchbasins and storm sewer connections. A better alternative is to install recharge trenches. These trenches will decrease storm sewer requirements and provide water for on-site landscape plantings.41 80

Recharge trenches with sufficient capacity to meet demands of a 50 or 100 year storm can be dug at the outer perimeter of a parking lot. Lined with filter fabric and filled with aggregate material, the trench collects stormwater and allows it to filter into the soil below.

This system can be used to convey water to adjacent planting beds and tree pits around the parking area. This system provides for efficient watering in a developed area of landscape plantings that might otherwise suffer from a lack of water.

Recharge trenches can be adapted for small and large sites. Trenches can be designed in conjunction with stormwater recharge beds located beneath parking lots paved with porous asphalt. Recharge beds differ from retention basins in that they do not hold accumulated runoff; rather, they allow water to percolate into subsoil.42 Morris

Arboretum, in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania has recently installed a paved porous asphalt parking lot with recharge beds beneath. Another site where this approach has been used effectively is the Headquarters Complex for Du Pont

Agricultural Chemicals in Wilmington, Delaware.

with stormwater-supplied irrigation water, quality can be a problem. De-icing agents, oil and other petroleum 81 products can result in pollution levels which are toxic to plants. Testing needs to be conducted periodically to assure this water source is safe for irrigation purposes.

C.2.2.2 Distribution and Delivery System. As with a domestic system, improvement and/or replacement of irrigation distribution and delivery systems can save large amounts of water. Over the past twenty-five years, vast improvements have been made in irrigation technology. Today, solid state computer technology has been incorporated with space-age materials, techniques, and computerization.

All botanic gardens and arboreta have irrigation needs specific to each institution. Improving and replacing leaking pipes, utilizing available computer irrigation controllers, and scheduling software are recommendations all public horticultural facilities should follow. By installing a more efficient irrigation system which can be controlled more accurately, significant water savings, labor savings, and improved plant vigor can be accomplished simultaneously.

Filoli Gardens, San Francisco, California, has planned, designed, installed, and maintains the finest retrofitted botanic garden irrigation system which I have observed. Its 82 new system is centered around the concept of separating each specific garden into water requirement zones, each being supplied with an individual controller. The staff utilize a computer-based irrigation scheduling process for each garden, based on specific plant requirements. Automatic controllers are utilized to allocate specified amounts of water during scheduled time periods. Drip irrigation, soil soakers, and a variety of sprinkler system types are utilized based on plant needs and aesthetic impact.

Sprinkler spacing and placement are no more than 50 percent of sprinkler head spray diameter, consequently eliminating over watering which occurs with typical spacing of 70 to 80 percent of sprinkler head spray diameter.43

Modern turf grass and golf course systems often utilize a centralized computer controller command center, or radio communicators to send and receive controller information. In addition, they have tensionmeters which tell a centralized computer exact soil moisture content. These systems are capable of meeting demands of the turf and agriculture industries which typically have only one to several crops to grow on uniform soils. However, they are not recommended by this writer for botanic gardens and arboreta due to the wide variety of plants grown by these 83 institutions, different site conditions, and varied water needs.

C.2.2.3. Water Reuse and Recvclinq. Use of recycled water for irrigation will reduce demand on fresh potable sources. Effluent from wastewater treatment plants is typically treated and released into stream and river flow.

By installing new connective piping utilizing this treated water for irrigation in a garden is possible. Longwood Garden's currently utilizes effluent from their wastewater treatment plant to irrigate a portion of their arboretum and recharge the aquifer from which they draw their water.

C.2.2.4. Xeriscape. The last long term irrigation management change recommended in this model is the development of at least one educational water conserving landscape garden. All public horticulture facilities have a community education role to fill. In all parts of the United states there is a need to instruct homeowners on how to design and install water conserving landscapes. This type of landscaping is also referred to as xeriscaping. The Wilbur D. May Arboretum & Botanical Garden, in Reno, Nevada, is an outstanding example of this type of garden. In their xeriscape garden they provide the local community with recommendations on methods, materials, and plants which can 84 be utilized by homeowners to redesign and build their own water conserving landscapes (see Appendix G, p.135).

Additionally, all botanic garden and arboreta landscape plantings and displays should be modified, when possible, to minimize water use. When new displays and landscape plantings are being planned, consider the naturally occurring topography, geology, and hydrology. Planned development must consider all parts of the natural environment prior to construction. This is extremely important in reducing and conserving irrigation water use.

C.3. Wastewater System For the purposes of this model the wastewater system can be one of several systems utilized to remove polluted domestic water and public waste sewage from a site. Wastewater may be a combination of human and household wastes, wash water, paper products, dirt, grit, and cleaning agents. It may also include paints, oils, cleaning fluids, heavy metals, and other toxins such as PCBs (polychlorinated biphenols), dioxin, etc. Human waste often carries with it human pathogens: microorganisms that cause illness. The need for effective solutions to existing wastewater treatment issues and to preserve water quality for the 85 future is an issue facing public horticulture institutions in the same way it faces all industries.

Wastewater systems can be as simple as a pipe running from a building into the woods, a domestic septic tank with an effluent leach field, or a sophisticated industrial package activated sludge system. All can be found at public horticulture facilities.

C.3.1. Short Term Management Chanqes Short term management changes for wastewater systems center around monitoring the system. An improperly functioning system can result in ground water as well as surface water pollution. To prevent this, the system must become part of an ongoing preventive maintenance monitoring program. Detection and repair of non-functioning system parts must be the goal of this program. staff training on proper operation and maintenance of wastewater disposal systems is vital. Monitoring wells should be installed in order to inspect groundwater for contamination.

C.3.2. Lonq Term Manaqement Chanqes

Long term management changes center around improving and upgrading systems to prevent pollution and encourage safe groundwater and stream recharge. This can be accomplished for either a conventional septic on-site 86 disposal system, or larger activated sludge type systems. The ultimate goal should be creation of a natural wastewater disposal system, one which is designed to work within the limitations of the local environment. For example, it might be possible to incorporate a natural system into the existing garden: one that filters wastewater, displays native plants, and can be interpreted for garden visitors. The following innovative system recommendations incorporates these concepts.

However, to understand some possible innovations for a conventional septic disposal system, a basic explanation of septic system practice is necessary. There are two basic requirements for a septic system: it must work hydrologically in moving effluent away from point of discharge and it must treat wastewater adequately before reaching ground or surface water.

A conventional system consists of both a septic tank, in which large portions of solids sink out and are reduced in part by anaerobic microbial decomposition; and a drainfield or dilution system, which accepts effluent from the septic tank. Drainfields are either a trench, seepage pit, or mound, utilizing natural biological and chemical processes in soil to purify water. After purification, 87 water eventually goes through the soil into aquifers and streams, evaporates, or is used by plants.

There are two site limitations which often prevent septic systems from working or cause established systems to fail. First is an inadequate treatment zone: either there is not enough unsaturated soil due to a high water table; or permeability is so great that water moves through soil too fast to undergo proper treatment. Second, permeability is too slow to move effluent away from point of discharge.

C.3.2.1. Conventional On-site Septic System Alternatives and Im9rovements. There are several alternatives and improvements to a conventional on-site septic system which, among other things, reduces nitrate contamination of ground water, a major problem with these systems. These innovations are problem-specific recommendations. Soil-hydrogeology dictates the use of one of these systems by an individual institution.

The first four technologies are soil treatment systems.

All four overcome slow permeabilitYi in addition, the last three deal with presence of an inadequate treatment zone. 1) Sand mound - utilizes pressure pump. Treatment is accomplished by an elevated absorption bed made of sandi 88 therefore the treatment zone is extended.« 2) Shallow pressure dosing trench - utilizes pressure pump. Shallow trench which can be located close to the surface employing pressure to ensure the even distribution of effluent.4S 3)

Elevated bed - utilizes pressure pump. This is a hybrid between a sand mound and shallow pressure dosing trench.

This locates the effluent absorption bed on the surface of the ground, and does not use sand or trenches.46 4)

Alternating fields - utilizes two soil drainfields, each smaller than a singular one would have to be. Each is used alternately, allowing one to rest between uses; theoretically the field could be used indefinitely. This allows use of slower percolating soils, prevents drain field clogging and ultimate malfunction.47

The next three technologies are groundwater penetration systems. All three can overcome problems of an inadequate treatment zone due to a high water table and presence of impermeable soils. 5) Sand lined trench - a trench which discharges right into groundwater, but contains sand which provides some treatment before discharge.~ 6) Sand filter trench - uses a pumping system, trench, and sand filter.

There are various designs which attempt to improve quality of effluent before discharge. In the recirculating sand filter, organic nitrogen is oxidized to nitrate; then 89 effluent moves into an anaerobic environment under the filter where it is microbial reduced to nitrogen gas and released into the atmosphere. Thus nitrogen is removed from effluent.49 7) Bermed infiltration pond - pond built into an area where a year round water table is present.

Effluent moves into the pond, is diluted and eventually moves out of the pond either through evaporation or ground water infiltration. Because dilution is crucial, size of the pond is important. Fish, plants, and other aquatic life can be added to the pond creating a living ecosystem, which facilitates treatment.50

The final three systems are miscellaneous in their application. 8) Artificial marsh - uses a rock filter and wetland with aquatic plants to treat effluent. Discharge is released directly into surface water or an evapotrans- piration system. 51 9) Evapotranspiration absorption system

- effluent drains into greenhouse or evapotranspiration drainfield. An evapotranspiration drainfield is a shallow excavation which is lined and filled with sand. After flowing into the drainfield or greenhouse, effluent either evaporates or is evapotranspired by plants.52 10) Graywater disposal - separates sewage into two components: blackwater, which is toilet waste and comprises 37 to 50 percent of residential and 90 percent of commercial sewage; 90 and graywater which is anything other than toilet waste. By using double piping, blackwater can be disposed of with a conventional system, composting, or incineration toilets. The gray water intern is disposed of into a leach field or evapotranspiration system; this water is often suitable for irrigation and could be utilized to supplement the irrigation system (see Appendix H for additional system information, p.143) .53

C.3.2.2. Innovative and Alternative Measures for Wastewater Treatment Plants. For institutions which require large wastewater treatment plants there also have been innovative and alternative technologies developed. Genesis for these developments is the need to promote recycling of resources, energy conservation, and purification of wastewater without resorting to chemical treatment.

One of the most innovative systems designed to replace an existing conventional wastewater treatment plant is the Solar Aquatic System (SAS). Two of these plants were visited during research for this thesis. They are located in Providence, Rhode Island and Harwich, Massachusetts. The Providence, RI, plant treats municipal sewage and the

Harwich, MA, plant treats septage. The system in both plants relies on biologically integrated technology to treat 91 septage, sludge, sewage, and industrial process wastewater

to high quality specifications.

This system duplicates, under controlled conditions,

the natural water purification processes of a freshwater wetland. SAS uses sustainable biological systems and

produces water which can be used for groundwater recharge,

irrigation, or returned to rivers or streams. Wastewater is circulated in translucent tanks inside a greenhouse through

a series of aquatic ecosystems which have the capability of

purifying sewage and sludge waste with bacteria, algae, zooplankton, aquatic plants, woody plants, pond weeds, fish,

and crustacea. Unlike conventional treatment systems which

separate solids from liquid, SAS aerates wastewater to keep

solids suspended and available to bacteria and microorganisms which act to break them down. In the process, various nutrients and pollutants in wastewater become part of the food chain that eventually results in clean water.

Both facilities visited in the course of this research

consisted 120' x 30' greenhouses. Walls are double layered polycarbonate; roof panels are constructed with tedlar and melinex films stretched within an aluminum frame. Temperature is controlled automatically with a series of 92 fans, wall and roof vents, and two gas heaters. Metal halide lights are used to augment photosytetic action and photoperiodism. Inside the greenhouses are parallel raceways running the length of the structure. Each raceway consists of twelve translucent cylinders and two treatment marshes. Wastewater flows through the system by gravity.

The solar aquatic wastewater system is an innovative process which is suited to meet needs of medium to large botanic gardens and arboreta. In addition, basic design of the system, its use of a greenhouse containment structure, artificial tidal marshes, and translucent cylinders teaming with plant and animal life, offer a unique opportunity for garden environmental education through opening a portion of the facility to visitation with interpretation. (see Appendix I for a detailed summary, p.146)

Longwood Gardens has made an innovative addition to its conventional package activated sludge wastewater treatment system. In the past, effluent from this 1960's vintage system was discharged into the flow of a local stream. Today effluent is pumped into a newly constructed, nine million gallon effluent storage pond. From there it is systematically discharged into a forty acre effluent spray field. This spray field irrigates a portion of Longwood's 93 arboretum as well as recharging the aquifer from which garden water is drawn. Monitor wells have been strategically placed to provide easy access for ground water contamination inspection. This system demonstrates a method for local cyclical use of water. Water is drawn from the local aquifer and used throughout the garden. Wastewater is treated, stored, and finally sprayed back on soil above the aquifer, recharging the aquifer from were it was drawn.

C.4 Conclusion

After reviewing this model, the most obvious question should be: what could be the expected minimum gain or outcome if a garden follows these steps? Because every public horticultural facility is different in size, funding, and management structure, it is impossible to establish a specific minimum monetary objective or savings. However, should all the steps in the model be followed and specific conservation measures enacted, the minimum expected outcome would be a reduction in water consumption, reduction in water expense, and an increase in the longevity of the operating system. This alone is of extreme value. 94

Endnote: Chapter 3

1. New England River Basin commission, Before the Well Runs Dry: A Seven-step Procedure for designing a Local Water Conservation Plan, Vol II, 1980, pp.11-15.

2. Anonymous Author, Water Conservation Manual for Development of a Water Conservation Plan, (New York state: Department of Environmental Conservation, 1989), pp.15-18.

3. Ibid.

4 . W. Y. Davis, et al, IWR-MAIN Water Use Forecasting System, Version 5.1: User's Manual and System Description, (US Army Corps of Engineers, Institute for Water Resources, Ft. Belvoir, VA, 1987), p.II-47.

5. Ibid. p.13.

6. L. Tolmach, Director of Horticulture and J. Tolmach Assistant Director of Maintenance operations, Filoli Gardens, (June 3, 1991), personal interview.

7 . J. J. Boland, et aI, An Assessment of Municipal and Industrial Water Use Forecasting Approaches, (US Army Corps of Engineers, Institute for Water Resources, Ft. Belvoir, VA, 1981), pp.I-2.

8. Ibid. pp.II-16.

9. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Baltimore District, 1987, p.A6.

10. Anonymous Author, Water Audit and Leak Detection Guidebook, (Sacramento, CA: State of California Department of Water Resources, Water Conservation Guidebook no. 5, 1986), p.5.

11. Ibid.

12. J.J. Boland, et aI, Forecasting Municipal and Industrial Water Use: A Handbook of Methods, (Baltimore, MD: Department of Geography and Environmental Engineering, Johns Hopkins University, 1983), pp.11-4, 11-5.

13. W.O. Maddaus, Water Conservation, (Denver, CO: American Water Works Association, 1987), pp.5-6. 95

14. Anonymous Author, Water Conservation Manual for Development of a Water Conservation Plan, (New York state: Department of Environmental Conservation, 1989), pp.57-60.

15. Ibid. p.60.

16. Ibid. p.49.

17. Ibid.

18. Ibid. p.49.

19. B. Blackwelder and P. Carlson, Survey of Water Conservation Programs in the Fifty States: Model Water Conservation Programs for the Nation, (Washington, DC: Environmental Policy Institute, 1982), p.40.

20. C. Burnstein, Director of Horticulture, Santa Barbara Botanic Garden, Santa Barbara CA, (May 31, 1991), personal interview.

21. Brown and Caldwell, Consultants, Case Studies of Industrial Water Conservation ~n the San Jose Area, (Sacramento, CA: Department of Water Resources Central Records Publication,1990), p.12.

22. J.G. Gregg, Senior Consultant, Personnel Relations, Employees Relations Department, E. I. DuPont de Nemours & Co., Wilmington DE, (October 15, 1991), personal interview.

23. Brown and Caldwell, Consultants, Case Studies of Industrial Water Conservation in the San Jose Area, (Sacramento, CA: Department of Water Resources Central Records Publication, 1990), pp. 53,101,111.

24. Ibid.

25. G.L. Craft, "AWWA Water Conservation Handbook," Proceedings of the National Water Conservation Conference on Publicly Supplied Potable Water, (Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Commerce/National Bureau of Standards, NBS #624, 1981), p.208.

26. W.D. Hudson, "Increasing Water System Efficiency Through Control of Unaccounted-For Water Loss Control," Water Conservation Strategies, (Denver, CO: American Water Works Association, 1980), p.96. 96

27. Anonymous Author, Water Conservation Manual for Development of a Water Conservation Plan, (New York state: Department of Environmental Conservation, 1989), p.38.

28. Ibid. p.38.

29. Anonymous Author, Water Loss Reduction Manual, (Denver, CO: American Water Works Association, 1986), p.61.

30. Anonymous Author, "Hydraulics and Water Loss Control, II AWWA Seminar Proceedings, (Denver, CO: American Water Works Association, 1991), p.51. 31. C. Momberger, Administrative and Facilities Manager, U.S. National Arboretum, (March 15, 1991), personal interview.

32. D.C. Yaeck, Executive Director of the Chester County, Pennsylvania, Water Resource Authority, (May 28, 1991), personal interview.

33. M.M. Karpisak, K.E. Foster, and N. Schmidt, Residential Water Conservation: Casa Del Agua, (Tucson, Arizona: Office of Arid Land Studies, Water Resources Bulletin, vol.26, nO.6, Dec. 1990), p.939.

34. D.C. Yaeck, Executive Director of the Chester County, Pennsylvania, Water Resource Authority, (May 28, 1991), personal interview. 35. Ibid. 36. W. Solley, Mid-Atlantic Regional Director, u. S. Geological Survey, (March 19, 1991), personal interview.

37. M. prillwitz, Landscape Water Conservation Guidebook, (Sacramento, CA: Department of Water Resources, Office of Water Conservation, 1988), p.7.

38. R.E. Walker and G.F. Kah, Landscape Water Auditor Handbook: Version 5.5, (Sacramento, CA: Water Conservation Office, Department of Water Conservation, 1990), p.7. 39. D.C. Yaeck, Executive Director of the Chester County, Pennsylvania, Water Resource Authority, (May 28, 1991), personal interview.

40. T. Shelton and B. Hamilton, Landscaping for Water Conservation: A Guide for New Jersey, (Princeton, NJ: Rutgers Cooperative Extension, 1987), p.40. 97

41. E. Brabec, Save Water Save Maintenance, Save Money: A Guide to Planning and Designing Water-Conserving Landscapes, (Anne Arundel County, MD: Department of utilities, 1989), pp.7-9.

42. Ibid. P.9 •

43. L. Tolmach, Director of Horticulture and J. Tolmach Assistant Director of Maintenance Operations Filoli Gardens, (June 3, 1991), personal interview.

44. J.R. Holthaus, Status Report to the Governor and General Assembly on the State of Maryland Innovative and Alternative On-Site Sewage Disposal Program, (Annapolis, MD: Department of Health and Mental Hygiene, Office of Environmental Programs, Water Management Administration, Inspection and Compliance Program, Division of Residential Sanitation, 1987), p.20.

45. Ibid. p.21.

46. Ibid. p. 22 •

47. Ibid.

48. Ibid.

49. Ibid. p.23.

50. Ibid.

51. Ibid.

52. Ibid. p.24.

53. Ibid. CHAPTER 4

CONCLUSION

Initial research into the need for this water management model indentified startling results. Across the united states many botanic gardens and arboreta currently face significant operational obstacles due to water related problems. These obstacles and problems are found in all areas of the country. In the deserts of the southwest, for example, the Sonora Desert Museum is faced with the problem of caring for its extensive botany collection while not pumping more water from its wells annually than is naturally recharged. In the mid-Atlantic region of the U.S., the

National Arboretum is facing the problem of needing to develop a new irrigation water source due mainly to the increasing cost of this resource.

Further research revealed that water problems to some degree affect all regions of the United States and segments of its society. Pollution, resource depletion, increased demand, and infrastructural stress and degradation are the most prolific problems affecting water; they are predicted

98 99 to escalate. Because of these and many other problems, all public horticultural facilities in this country potentially face significant operational and supply related problems in the near future.

Additional research was conducted by inspecting gardens of all types, and interviewing staff in both the eastern and western United states. What became obvious was that there are few fields more dependent on a reliable quantity and quality of water than botanic gardens and arboreta.

However, like most institutions in the United states, botanic gardens and arboreta appear to have taken clean, safe, inexpensive water for granted, and consequently manage it poorly.

Development of the water conservation management model was undertaken as a means of improving public gardens' ability to assess, mitigate, and respond to current and potential water problems. The objectives of the model are specific and action-oriented. The steps in the model are based on recommended responses to specific and potential water issues facing public gardens. Interviews with federal, state, and regional water authorities and results of their research and experiance guided the development of the model. 100

Water management planning, if undertaken properly, can improve an institution's ability to respond to water problems in an effective and lasting manner. This concept is the premise upon which the model is based and is the minimum expection if it is used.

Indications are that the consequences of continuing to manage water resources inefficiently in public horticultural institutions will result in increasing costs for providing this resource. Economic benefits of changing current water management practices versus the cost or impact of doing nothing are not well documented for these institutions. The economic costs resulting from conducting little if any water management change are uncertain. However, crisis management, which often occurs when problems are not assessed and planned for, is ineffective and economically costly. This management model outlines a more proactive approach to water management.

This management model provides botanic gardens and arboreta a means and method to manage water resource efficiently. Efficient management will minimumly result in a substantial water and cost savings, longevity of existing water systems, and an increased ability to meet expanding water demand with current water supplies. It is intended to 101 facilitate the planning process and, ultimately, reduce vulnerability to ever increasing water problems. BIBLIOGRAPHY

Adler, J. 1981. "Are We Running Out of Water?" Newsweek, Vol. 97, February 23, pp.26-37.

Adler, J. 1981. "Drought in The Northeast." Newsweek, Vol. 97, January 5, p.20.

American Water Works Association. 1980. Water Conservation at Home. Denver, CO: AWWA.

American Water Works Association. 1980. Water Loss Reduction Manual. Denver, CO: American Water Works Association.

Anderson, J.L. (ed.). 1991. Water Resources Planning and Management and Urban Water Resources. New York: American Society of Civil Engineers.

Anonymous Author. 1979. Private Water Systems Handbook. Ames, Iowa: Midwest Plan Service.

Anonymous Author. 1986. "Water in America." The Economist, October 4, 1986, p.35.

Anonymous Author. 1989. Water Conservation Manual for Develooment of a Water Conservation Plan. Albany, New York: Department of Environmental Conservation.

Armstrong, E.L. (ed.). 1976. History of Public Works in the United States: 1776 - 1976. Chicago, IL: American Public Works Association.

Baldwin, R. 1977. "conserving Water in the Landscape." California Turfarass Culture, Vol. 27, Spring, pp.2-3.

Bandar, R.G., (ed.). 1974. Low Maintenance Gardening. Menlo Park, CA: Sunset Books, Lane PUblishing Co ••

Barnett, H.J. and M.C. Morse. 1973. Scarcity and Growth: the Economics of Natural Resources Availability_ Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press.

102 103

Baumann, D.O., J.J. Boland, and J.H. Sims. 1980. "The Problems of Defining Water Conservation," The Cornett Papers. Victoria, British Columbia: University of victoria Press.

Blackwelder, B. and P. Carlson. 1982. Survey of Water Conservation Proarams in the Fifty States: Model Water Conservation Proarams for the Nation. Washington, DC: Environmental Policy Institute.

Boland, J.J., et.al. 1983. Forecasting Municipal and Industrial Water Use: A Handbook of Methods. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press.

Boland, D. 1988. "Lawn and Water Conservation." The Green Thumb, Vol. 45 (1), Denver Botanic Garden, Spring/ Summer.

Brabec, E. 1989. A Guide to Plannina and Desianina Water-Conserving Landscapes. Annapolis, MD: Anne Arundel County, Department of utilities.

Brabec, E. 1990. A Homeowner's Guide To Water -Conserving Landscapes. Annapolis, MD: Anne Arundel County, Department of utilities.

California Department of Water Resources. 1974. How To Save Water in the Landscape. Sacramento, CA: Department of Water Resources.

1979. Impact of Severe Drought in Marin County. California. Bulletin 206. Sacramento, CA: Department of Water Resources.

1981. How to do a Residential Retrofit Proaram. Water Conservation Guidebook No.1. Sacramento, CA: Department of Water Resources.

1984. Desianina a Public Information Proaram for Water Conservation. Water Conservation Guidebook No. 3. Sacramento, CA: Department of Water Resources.

1986. Water Audit and Leak Detection Guidebook. Water Conservation Guidebook No.5. Sacramento, CA: Department of Weter Resources.

1988. Guide on Conservation - Oriented Water Rates. Sacramento, CA: Department of Water Resources. 104 1990. Landscape Water Auditor Handbook. Version 5.5. Sacramento, CA: Department of Water Resources. 1990. Case Studies of Industrial Water Conservation in the San Jose Area. Sacramento, CA: Department of Water Resources.

1991. Urban Drought Guidebook. Sacramento, CA: Department of Water Resources. Chatto, B. 1978. The Dry Garden. London, England: J.M. Dent & Sons Publishers. Corson, W.H., (ed.). 1990. The Global Ecoloqy Handbook: What You Can do About the Environmental Crisis. Boston: Beacon Press. Davis, W.Y. 1987. IWR-MAIN Water Use Forecasting System. Version 5.1: User's Manual and System Description. Ft. Belvoir, VA: U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Institute for Water Resources. Delaware River Basin Commission. 1989. Delaware River Basin Water Code. West Trenton, NJ: Delaware River Basin Commision. Delaware River Basin Commission. 1991. Water Resources Proqram 1990 -1991. West Trenton, NJ: Delaware River Basin Commission.

De Moncada, C. 1979. Water Management in the Washinqton Metropolitan Area. Washington DC: Environment & Natural Resources Policy Division, congressional Research Service. Goubert, J.P. 1989. The Conquest of Water. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.

Hillel, D.J. 1991. Out of the Earth: Civilization and the Life of the Soil. New York: The Free Press.

Holmes, F.W. 1988. "Drought After - Effects: How They Can Harm Trees." Arbor Aqe, Vol. 8 (7), July, p.5. Holmes, J.K. and R.C. steiner. 1990. 20 Year Water Demand Forecast and Resource Availabilitv Analvsis for the Washinqton Metropolitan Area. Rockville, MD: Interstate Commission on the Potomac River Basin. 105 Holthaus, J.R. 1987. status Report to the Governor and General AssemblY on the state of Maryland Innovative and Alternative On-site Sewaqe Disposal Proqram. Annapolis, MD: Department of Healthand Mental Hygiene, Office of Environmental Programs, Water Management Administration.

Horton, T. 1987. Bay Country: Reflections on the Chesapeake. New York: Ticknor & Fields.

Hudson, W.D. 1980. "Increasing Water System Efficiency Through Controll of Unaccounted-For Water Loss Control," Water Conservation Strateqies. Denver, CO: American Water Works Association.

Karl, T.R., and R.W. Knight. 1985. Atlas of MonthlY Palmer Drouqht Severity Index (1895-1930) for the Contiguous united States. Asheville, NC: National Climatic Data Center.

Karl, T.R., and R.W. Knight. 1985. Atlas of Monthly Palmer Drouaht Severity Index (1931-1983) for the Contiauous united States. Asheville, NC: National Climatic Data Center. Karpiscak, M.M., K.E. Foster, and N. Schmidt. 1990. "Residential Water Conservation: Casa Del Agua." Water Resources Bulletin, Vol. 26, No.6: pp.936-947. Keck, L. 1987. Interim State Drought Manaqement Plan. Nashville, TN: Tennessee Department of Health and Environment; Office of Water Management.

Keck, L. 1988. Local Drought Manaaement Plannina Guide for Public Water Suppliers. Nashville, TN: Tennessee Department of Health and Environment; Office of Water Management. Kentucky Natural Resources and Enviromental Protection Cabinet. 1987. Kentucky Water Shortaqe Response Plan. Frankfort, Kentucky: Kentucky Department for Environmental Protection.

Kourick, R. 1988. "Tapping Into Gray Water." National Gardenina, Vol. 11 (8), August, pp.52-54.

Leggett, J. (ed). 1990. Global Warmina: The Greenpeace Report. New York: Oxford University Press. 106

Leopold, L.B. and W.B. Langbein. 1960. A Primer on Water. Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office.

Maddaus, W.O. 1987. Water Conservation. Denver, CO: American Water Works Association.

Maryland Water Supply Division. 1987. The Ouantity and Natural Ouality of Ground Water in MArvland. Annapolis, MD: Maryland Department of Natural Resources, Water Resources Administration.

Meyers, C.J., A.D. Tarlock, J.N. Corbridge, JR., and David H. Getches. 1988. Water Resource Management: A Casebook in Law and Public Policy. Mineola, New York: The Foundation Press.

Mosher, L. 1988. "Where's the Water?" National Journel, Vol. 20, No.5, p.256.

Nelson, J.O. 1987. "Water Conserving Landscapes Show Impressive Savings." Journal AWWA, Vol. 80 (3), March, pp.35-42.

New England River Basin Commission. 1980. Before the Well Runs Dry: A Seven-Step Procedure for Designinq a Local Water Conservation Plan. Vol II. Boston: New England River Basin Commission.

North, R.M. 1991. "Pricing Policy for Water Services," Water Resources Planninq and Managment and Urban Water Resources. J.L. Anderson, ed. New York: American Society of civil Engineers.

Organization for Economic Co-Operation and Development. 1991. The state of the Environment. Paris: OECD.

Ostrega, S.F. 1991. "Demand Management in New York City," Water Resources Planning and Management and Urban Water Resources. J.L. Anderson, ed. New York: American Society of civil Engineers.

Owen, L.W. and W.R. Mills, Jr. 1991. "California's Orange County Water District: A Model for Comrehensive Water Resources Management," Water Resources Planning and Management and Urban Water Resources. J. L. Anderson, ed. New York: American Society of civil Engineers. 107

Postel, S. 1985. "Water: Rethinking Management in an Age of Scarcity," Worldwatch Institute Paper 62. Washington, DC: Worldwatch Institute.

Postel, S. 1985. "Conserving Water: The Untapped Alternative," Worldwatch Paper 67. Washington, DC: Worldwatch Institute.

Postel, S. 1986. "Managing Freshwater Supplies," Worldwatch Paper 42. Washington, DC: Worldwatch Institute.

Postel, S. 1986. "Increasing Water Efficiency," The state of the World 1986. New York: Norton Press.

Postel, S. 1987. "Defusing the Toxic Threat: controlling Pesticides and Industrial Waste," Worldwatch Paper 79. Washington, DC: Worldwatch Institute.

Prillwitz, M. 1988. Landscape Water Conservation Guidebook. Sacramento, CA: Department of Water Resources, Office of Water Conservation.

Reisner, M. 1986. Cadillac Desert. New York: Penguin Books.

Robinette, G.O. 1984. Water Conservation in Landsca~e Design and Management, New York: Van Nostrand Reinhold.

Rogers, P. 1983. "The Future of Water; The Threats to the Resources are Real, but not Insuurmountable." The Atlantic Monthly, Vol. 252., July, p.80.

Ross, D.J. 1991. "Water pricing to Achieve Efficient Allocation Among Competing Users," Water Resources Planninq and Management and Urban Water Resources. J.L. Anderson, ed. New York: American Society of civil Engineers.

Ross, D.S., R.A. Parson, and H.E. Garpenter. 1985. Trickle Irrigation in the Eastern united States. Northeast Regional Agricultural Engineering Service.

Shekton, T.B. and B.A. Hamilton. 1985. Landscaping for Water Conservation - A Guide for New Jersev, New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers Cooperative Extension, Cook College, Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey. 108 stanfield, R. L. 1985. "Enough and Clean Enough?" National Journel, Vol. 17, No. 33-34, p.1876.

Tate, D.M. 1990. Water Demand Management in Canada: A state-of-the-Art Review. ottawa: Inland Waters Directorate, Water Planning and Management Branch.

Wilhit, D.A. 1990. Plannina for Drouaht: A Process for state Government. Lincoln, Nebraska: International Drought Information Center, University of Nebraska.

Williams, T.H. 1984. Usina Tensiometers for Irriaation Scheduling. Cooperative Extension Service, Newark: University of Delaware.

Woodruff, P.H. 1991. "Water, Water Everywhere and Nary a Drop to Drink." The Everqreen Journal Summer 91: p.12. APPENDIX A

GLOSSARY

109 110

Glossary

Absorption. The process of taking up one substance into the body of another, such as a sponge absorbing water.

Adsorption. Attraction and holding of one substance on the surface of another; this often involves the attraction of molecules in gases and liquids to the surface of a solid.

Acid Hine Drainage. Drainage of water from areas that have been mined for coal or other mineral ores; the water has a low pH, sometimes less than 2.0.

Acid Rain. Precipitation that has a low pH (less than pH 5.6, which is normal for "natural" precipitation).

Aerobic. Living or active only in the presence of oxygen (atmospheric air). Aerobic Decomposition. To decay by aerobic microorganisms.

Aggregate. A mass or cluster of soil particles, often having a characteristic shape. Agrochemical. Synthetic chemicals (pesticides and fertilizers) used in agricultural production.

Alkalinity. The capacity of water to neutralize acids by its content of bicarbonates, carbonates or hydroxides (alkaline substances).

Anaerobic. Living or active in the absence of oxygen.

Anaerobic Decomposition. Reduction of organic matter by anaerobic microorganisms in an oxygen-free environment. Aquifer. A geologic formation that can hold - and provide - large quantities of water readily. Aquifers can be classified as confined or unconfined. 111

Assimilative capacity. Natural ability of soil, surface water or ground water to accept (use and decompose) potential pollutants without harmful effects to the environment. Best Management Practices (BHP·s). structural, nonstructural, and managerial techniques that are recognized to be the most effective and practical means to control nonpoint source pollutants yet are compatible with the productive use of the resource to which they are applied. Biochemical oxygen Demand (BOD). A laboratory measurement of the "strength'l or potency of an organic or inorganic waste; the test determines the amount of oxygen used by microorganisms as they biochemically degrade the waste. BOD values provide a somewhat standard measure of how much oxygen will be required to degrade a waste, and therefore reflect the effect the waste may have on aquatic organisms that require oxygen to live. Biodegradable. Capable of being broken down (decomposed) by microorganisms. Black Water. Liquid and solid human body waste and the carriage water generated through toilet usage.

Buffer strips. strips of grass or other close-growing vegetation that separate a waterway (ditch, stream, creek) from an intensive land-use area (subdivision, farm); also referred to as filter strips, vegetated filter strips, and grass buffers. Chemical Oxygen Demand (COD). An indirect measure of the amount of oxygen used by inorganic and organic matter in water. The measure is a laboratory test based on a chemical oxidant and therefore does not necessarily correlate with biochemical oxygen demand. 112

Chlorination. One method of disinfecting water (either drinking water or wastewater). There is some concern that chlorine used in wastewater disinfection may be harmful to sensitive aquatic organisms inhabiting the waters that receive the treated wastewater.

Chlorine Residual. The total amount of chlorine remalnlng in water, sewage, or industrial wastewater fOllowing chlorination for a specified period of time.

Clay. One type of soil particle with a diameter of approximately one ten-thousandth of an inch.

Clay Soil. A soil containing more than 40 percent clay, but less than 45 percent sand, and less than 40 percent silt. Coliform Bacteria. A special kind of bacteria that produces acid and gas when decomposing lactose (a carbohydrate also known as milk sugar) under anaerobic conditions. Coliform bacteria typically inhabit the intestines of warm- blooded animals, as well as the surfaces of plants and soil.

Combined Sewer. A sewer that transports surface runoff and human domestic wastes (sewage), and sometimes industrial wastes.

Combined Sewer Overflow. Flow of wastewater and runoff in a combined sewer in excess of the sewer capacity. It represents the flow that cannot be treated immediately and is frequently discharged directly to a receiving stream without treatment, or to a holding basin for subsequent treatment and disposal. compostinq. A controlled microbial degradation of organic waste yielding an environmentally sound, nuisance-free product of potential value as a soil conditioner.

Confined Aquifer. An aquifer whose upper, and perhaps lower, boundary is defined by a (confining) layer of natural material that does not transmit water readily. 113

Cost Effectiveness. A measure used to compare alternatives on the basis of cost inputs per unit of resulting benefits. Cost sharing. A publicly financed program through which society, as the beneficiary of environment protection, shares part of the cost of pollution control with those who must actually install the controls.

Deep Percolation. Downward movement of water through the soil profile to ground water.

Denitrification. The biochemical conversion of nitrate and nitrite nitrogen in the soil or dissolved in water to gaseous nitrogen.

Digestion. The biochemical decomposition of organic matter in sludge resulting in a somewhat stable (humus-like) mass (depending on how long digestion is allowed to proceed).

Dissolved Oxygen. Oxygen dissolved in water and readily available to aquatic organisms.

Diversion. A structural conveyance (or Ditch) constructed across a slope to intercept runoff flowing down a hillside, and divert it to some convenient discharge point.

Drainage. A technique to improve the productivity of land by removing excess water from the soil; surface drainage is accomplished with open ditches; subsurface drainage uses porus conduits (drain tile) buried beneath the soil surface.

Ecosystem. An interactive group of organisms that exist in the same natural community or environment. Effluent. Wastewater as it leaves some type of treatment system, such as septic tank effluent or municipal wastewater treatment plant effluent. Escherichia coli. A specie of fecal coliforms that inhabit the intestines of people and other vertebrates. 114

Erosion. Wearing away of soil by running water, wind, or ice; erosion is the process by which the earth's surface is shaped and occurs even in remote, uninhabited areas at a slow rate; of more concern is accelerated erosion caused by people's activities. Eutrophication. The natural aging process of surface waters (such as rivers, streams, reservoirs) through enrichment by nutrients. Eutrophication is accelerated by people's activities; in the end, eutrophication results in the complete filling and drying up of a water body.

Evaporation. The conversion of a liquid into a gas through the addition of energy. Evapotranspiration. Loss of water to the atmosphere from the earth's surface by evaporation and by transpiration through plants. Facultative Anaerobe. A bacterium that grows under either aerobic or anaerobic conditions.

Fauna. The animal life characteristic of a region or environment.

Fecal Coliform. Coliform bacteria that originate in the o intestinal tract of humans and other warm- blooded animals; fecal coliform are not harmful to humans by themselves, but are used to indicate the potential presence of other harmful bacteria.

Floodplain. The flat or nearly flat land on the floor of a stream valley or tidal area that is covered by water during floods.

Flora. Plants and microorganisms present in a given environment. Formation. A group of similar consolidated (that is, relatively solid) rocks or unconsolidated (that is, relatively loose) minerals. Giardia. Giardia lamblia, a protozoa that moves in a liquid by a whip-like tail, and cause diarrhea in humans. 115

Gully. A deep channel cut into the soil surface by accelerated erosion; a gully is so deep and/or wide that it cannot be smoothed out by tillage operations.

Graywater. Wastewater other than sewage, such as sink drainage or washing machine discharge.

Ground Water. Water beneath the earth's surface at varying depths; in reservoirs called aquifers.

Hardness. Condition of water, caused mostly by natural occurring mineral impurities, that prevents suds formation by soap.

Hazardous Waste. Any waste material that is potentially dangerous, including, but not limited to, explosives, radioactive materials, and chemicals.

Household Hazardous Waste. Any number of commonly used household cleaning products, workshop and outdoor chemicals, automotive fluids and personal care products that are potentially dangerous to the environment.

Humus. Organic portion of the soil remaining after prolonged microbial decomposition.

Hydrologic Cycle. A term used by scientists to describe the constant movement of water in and on the earth and atmosphere; numerous processes (such as precipitation, evaporation, runoff) comprise the hydrologic cycle.

Infiltration. The entry of water (from precipitation, irrigation, or runoff) into the soil profile.

Infiltration Rate. The quantity of water that can enter the soil surface in a specified time interval.

Inorganic Chemicals. Naturally occurring or synthetic chemical compounds that contain no carbon.

Interflow. Lateral movement of water in the upper layer of soil. 116

Landfill. Facility in which solid waste from municipal and/or industrial sources is disposed; sanitary landfills are those landfills that are operated in accordance with environmental protection standards.

Leachate. Water containing dissolved substances that moves downward through some specified material, such as landfill leachate - subsurface drainage from a landfill.

Leachinq. The removal of soluble materials from a substance as water moves through it. Loadinq. The quantity of a substance entering the environment (soil, water, or air).

Kanaqerial Controls. Methods of nonpoint source pollution controls that are derived from managerial decisions, such as changes in application times or rates for agrochemicals.

Microorqanism. A simple form of life with microscopic dimensions; microbes.

Mineralization. The microbial conversion of an element from an organic to an inorganic state.

MPN. Most probable number ; a statistical expression for estimating the number of microorganisms in a culture (or, for example, a quantity of water).

Municipal sewaqe. Wastes (mostly liquid) originating from a community; may be composed of domestic wastewaters and/or industrial wastewaters. Mulch. Any substance spread or allowed to remain on the soil surface to conserve soil moisture and shield soil particles from the erosive forces of raindrops and runoff. Nitrification. The biochemical transformation of ammonium nitrogen to nitrate nitrogen.

Nitroqen Fixation. The biological or chemical process by which elemental nitrogen, from air, is converted to organic or available nitrogen. 117

Nonpoint Source (NPS) Pollution. Pollution of surface or ground water supplies originating from land- use activities and/or the atmosphere, having no well defined point of entry. Organic Chemicals. Any number of natural or synthetic chemical compounds containing the element carbon in combination with other elements; organic chemicals are used in a variety of everyday applications from fuel to pest control. Oxidation. The process of combining with oxygen.

Partition Coefficient. A measure of the extent to which a pesticide is divided between the soil and water phases. Pathogens. Disease causing microorganisms. Percolation. Downward movement of water through the soil profile or other substance.

Percolation Rate. The rate at which water moves through saturated granular materials, such as soil. pH. A measure to indicate and acid or alkaline condition; pH values can range from zero (extremely acid) to 14 (extremely basic or alkaline); pH near 7 is considered neutral; pH measurements use a non-linear scale such that pH 6 is 10 times more acidic than pH 7, and pH 5 is 100 times more acidic than pH 7. Point Source Pollution. Pollution of ground or surface water supplies at well-defined, usually manufactured, "points" or locations; discharge of treated wastewater from municipal and industrial treatment plants are common point sources of pollution. 118

Pollutant. Any substance of such character and in such quantities that upon reaching the environment (soil, water, or air), is degrading in effect so as to impair the environment's usefulness or render it offensive. Pollution. The occurrence of contaminating materials in the environment (water, soil, or atmosphere) above natural, background levels.

Potable. suitable for drinking.

Recharge Area. Land area over which precipitation infiltrates into the soil and percolates downward to replenish an aquifer.

Runoff. The portion of precipitation, snow melt, or irrigation that flows over and through the soil, eventually making its way to surface water supplies (such as streams, rivers, ponds). salinity. The quality of water based on its salt content. sanitary Sewer. A sewer that transports only wastewaters (from domestic residences and/or industries) to a wastewater treatment plant. seepage. The percolation of water through the soil from unlined channels, ditches, watercourses and water storage facilities. septage. The liquid and semisolid contents removed by pumping from a septic tank. septic system. An onsite system designed to treat and dispose of domestic sewage; a typical septic system consists of a tank that receives wastes from a residence or business and a system of tile lines or a pit for disposal of the liquid effluent that remains after decomposition of the solids by bacteria in the tank. 119 sewage. Liquid and solid wastes carried in sewers. sludge. In wastewater treatment, the semisolid part of sewage and bacterial mass that has been acted upon by bacteria and settled and/or been removed from the treated wastewater. storm Sewer. A sewer that collects and transports surface runoff to a discharge point (infiltration basin, receiving stream, treatment plant).

Total Dissolved Solids. All materials that passes a filter of a specific size.

Toxic Substance. Any substance that can be harmful to plant or animal life.

Treated Wastewater. Wastewater that has been subjected to one or more physical, chemical, and biological processes to reduce its pollution or health hazard.

Turbidity. A condition in water or wastewater caused by the presence of suspended materials resulting in scattering and absorption of light rays.

Unconfined Aquifer. An aquifer whose upper boundary (the water table) is made up of relatively loose, unconsolidated natural material that transmits water readily; also referred to as water table aquifers.

Underqround storage Tank (UST). A container buried in the soil designed to store various liquids, especially fuels.

Variable Costs. Input costs that change as the nature of the production activity or its circumstances change; for example, as production levels vary.

Volatilization. Loss of a substance through evaporation. 120 Wastewater. Literally, water that has been used for some purpose and discarded, or wasted; typically liquid discharged from domestic residential, business, and industrial sources that contains a variety of wastes (fecal matter, byproducts).

Wastewater Treatment Plant. A facility that receives wastewater (and sometimes runoff) from domestic and/or industrial sources, and by a combination of physical, chemical, and biological processes reduces (treats) the wastewater to less harmful byproducts.

WCMTF Water Conservation Management Task Force.

Watershed An area of land that contributes runoff to one specific delivery point; large watersheds may be composed of several smaller "subsheds", each of which contributes runoff to different locations that ultimately combine at a common delivery point.

Water Table. The upper level of a saturated zone below the soil surface, often the upper boundary of a water table aquifer.

Water Table Aquifer. See Unconfined Aquifer.

Waste storage Pond. An impoundment for containing liquid wastes. Waste Treatment Lagoon. An impoundment for liquid wastes, so designed as to accomplish some degree of biochemical treatment of the wastes.

Wetlands. Any of a number of tidal and nontidal areas characterized by saturated or nearly saturated soils most of the year that form an interface between terrestrial (land-based) and aquatic environments; include freshwater marshes around ponds and channels (rivers and streams), brackish and salt marshes. APPENDIX B Recommended Uses of Meters by Classification All meter installations should be reviewed to determine whether the proper meter has been chosen for each installation. The following table lists uses of meters by classification. (This information is taken from an article by Ed Seruga, "Sizing and Selecting Modern Water Meters," in Water Engineering and Management, January 1982.) ~efer to the AWWA publication, Water Meters - Selection, Installation, Testing, and Maintenance (AWWA number M6) for additional information.

Type Size Application positive 5/8" Residences, small apartments, small businesses. Displacement Demand flow rates: l/S to 29 gpm. Maximum continuous demand to 10 gpm.

3/4" Large residences, small to medium apartments. Demand flow rates: 1/4 to 30 gpm. Maximum continuous demand to 15 gpm.

1" Medium apartments, small motels, filling stations, small businesses, industrial processes. Demand flow rates: 3/S to 50 gpm. Max~um continuous demand to 25 gpm.

1-1/2" Medium motels, hotels, large apartments, small industry, small processing plants. Demand flow rates: 5/S to 100 gpm. Maximum continuous demand to SO gpm.

2" Larger hotels, motels, apartment complexes, Industrial plants, processing plants. Demand flow rates: 1-1/4 to 160 gpm. Maximum continuous demand to SO gpm.

121 122 (Table Continued)

Class 11- 2" Medium to large hotels, motels, large apartment Turbine complexes, industrial plants, processing plants, irrigation. Demand flow rates: 3 to 200 gpm. Maximum continuous demand to 160 gpm.

3" Large hotels, motels, industrial plants, proc•••1n9 pl.n~., 1rrL9.~1on. Demand flow rates: 4.3 to 450 gpm. Maximum continuous demand to 350 gpm.

4" Large industrial and processing plants, irrigation, refineries, petro-chemicals, pump discharge. Demand flow rates: 25 to 2,500 gpm. Maximum continuous demand - 1,000 gpm.

6" Large industrial manufacturing and processing plants, irrigation, pump discharge. Demand flow rates: 25 to 2,500 gpm. Maximum continuous demand - 2,000 gpm.

Class I - 8" Industrial, manufacturing, processing, pump Turbine Discharge. Demand flow rates: 140 to 1,800 gpm. Maximum continuous demand - 900 gpm.

10" Industrial, manufacturing, processing, pump discharge. Demand flow rates: 225 to 2,900 gpm. Maximum continuous demand to 1,450 gpm.

12" Industrial, manufacturing, processing, pump discharge. Demand flow rates: 400 to 4,300 gpm. Maximum continuous demand to 2,150 gpm.

Compound, New Hiqh- Medium motels, hotels, special processes which Velocity styles has high and low demand; schools, public buildings, large apartment and condominium complexes, hospitals, public gardens.

2" Demand flow rates: 1/4 to 160 gpm. Maximum continuous demand to 160 gpm.

3" Demand flow rates: 1/2 to 350 gpm. Maximum continuous demand to 350 gpm. APPENDIX C

List of Materials Which Can be Used for staff Education and Traininq

Books

Alliance for the Chesapeake Bay. Baybook: A quide to Reducing Water Pollution at Home. 1986. 32pp. Paperback. Single copies free, multiple copies $1.00 each.

Concern, Inc. Drinking Water: A Community Action Guide. Washington, DC, 1984. 23pp. Paperback, $3.00.

Conservation Foundation. Toward Clean Water: A Guide to citizen Action. Washington, DC, 1976. 328 pp. $10.00.

Costner, Pat. We All Live Downstream: A Guide to Wastewater Treatment That stops Water Pollution. Waterworks PUblishing Co. 1986. 92 pp. Paperback, $6.95.

Hansen, Nancy Richardson et ale controlling Nonpoint Source Water Pollution. A citizen's Handbook. Washington, DC and New York, NY: the Conservation Foundation And National Audubon Society, 1988. 170 pp. Paperback, $7.50.

King, Jonathan. Troubled Waters. Emmaus, PA: Rodale Press, 1985. 235pp. Paperback, $8.95.

Powledge, Fred. Water: the Nature, Uses and Future of Our Most Precious and Abused Resource. New York: Farrar strauss Giroux, 1982. 423 pp. Paperback, $7.95.

Reisner, Marc. Cadillac Desert: The American West and Its Disaopearinq Water. New York: Penguin Books, 1986. 582 pp. Paperback, $9.95.

U.s. Environmental Protection Agency. Is Your Drinking Water Safe? 20pp. Free. Available from EPA, Public Information Center, PM 211-B, 820 Quincy Street, N.W., washington, DC 20011.

124 125 Periodicals

Clean Water Action News, Clean Water Action, 317 Pennsylvania Avenue, S.E., Washington, DC 20003. One Year, 4 issues, $24.

EPI's Groundwater Monitor, published occasionally by the Environmental Policy Institute, 218 D street. S.E., Washington, DC 20003. Free. u.s. Water News, Circulation Department, 230 Main street, Halstead, Kansas 67056. One year, 12 issues, $28.

World Rivers Review, International Rivers Network, 301 Broadway, suite B, San Francisco, CA 94133. Published bimonthly. Films and Videos

Great Lakes: Troubled Waters. 1987. Examines the threat to one of the most important fresh water supplies - the sources of pollution and governmental policies. Umbrella Films.

The Valley Green. 1987. Examines the complex interrelationship of the natural world of Wissahickon Creek with urban Philadelphia. Umbrella Films.

Water: A precious Resource. 1980. Explains where water comes from and how it is endlessly recycled. Demonstrates many ways in which this resource is used and abused. National Geographic Society. Sources for Further Reference Materials

American Water Works Association. 1990-1991 Publications Catalog. Denver, Colorado. Catalog updated annually.

California Department of Water Resources, Office of Water Conservation. A Catalog of Water Conservation Information. Sacramento, California.

California Department of Water Resources, Office of Water Conservation. A Catalog of Water Conservation Public Information Materials. Sacramento, California. APPENDIX D Leak Loses for Holes, Joints, , Cracks Under Different Pressures

126 127

Leak Losses for Holes, Joints, & Cracks Under Different Pressures

Circular Holes (Gallons per Minute)

Diameter Area Water Pressure in Pounds per Square Inch of hole of hole ------inches sq. in. 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160

0.1 0.008 1.1 1.5 1.8 2.1 2.4 2.6 2.8 3.0 0.2 0.031 4.3 6.0 7.4 8.5 9.5 10.5 11.3 12.1 0.3 0.071 9.6 13.6 16.6 19.2 21.5 23.5 25.4 27.2 0.4 0.126 17.1 24.2 29.6 34.2 38.2 41.8 45.2 48.3 0.5 0.196 26.7 37.7 46.2 53.4 59.7 65.4 70.6 75.5

0.6 0.283 38.4 54.4 66.6 76.9 85.9 94.1 101.7 108.7 0.7 0.385 52.3 74.0 90.6 104.6 117.0 128.1 138.4 148.0 0.8 0.503 68.3 96.6 118.3 136.6 152.8 167.4 180.8 193.2 0.9 0.636 86.5 122.3 149.8 172.9 193.4 211.8 228.8 244.6 1.0 0.785 106.8 151.0 184.9 213.5 238.7 261.5 282.5 302.0

1.1 0.950 129.2 182.7 223.7 258.3 288.8 316.4 341.8 365.4 1.2 1.131 153.7 217.4 266.3 307.5 343.7 376.6 406.7 434.8 1.3 1.327 180.4 255.1 312.5 360.8 403.4 441.9 477.3 510.3 1.4 1.539 209.2 295.9 362.4 418.5 467.9 512.5 553.6 591.8 1.5 1.767 240.2 339.7 416.0 480.4 537.1 588.4 635.5 679.4

1.6 2.011 273.3 386.5 473.4 546.6 611.1 669.4 723.1 773.0 1.7 2.270 308.5 436.3 534.4 617.1 689.9 755.7 816.3 872.6 1.8 2.545 345.9 489.2 599.1 691.8 773.4 847.3 915.1 978.3 1.9 2.835 385.4 545.0 667.5 770.8 861.8 944.0 1020 1090 2.0 3.142 427.0 603.9 739.6 854.0 954.9 1046 1130 1208

Formula: Q(gallons per minute) = (30.394) x (A) x (square root of P) "A" = Area in square inches, "P" = Pressure in pounds per square inch

Joints & Cracks Water Pressure in Pounds Per Square Inch

Area 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 Lenath Width

1.0 1/32 3.2 4.5 5.5 6.4 7.1 7.8 8.4 9.0 1.0 1/16 6.4 9.0 11.0 12.7 14.2 15.6 16.9 18.0 1.0 1/8 12.7 18.0 22.1 25.5 28.5 31.2 33.7 36.0 1.0 1/4 25.5 36.0 44.1 51.0 57.0 62.4 67.4 72.1 Formula: Q(gallons per minute) = (22.796) x (A) x (square root of P) "A" = Area in square inches, "P" = Pressure in pounds per square inch APPENDIX E

Leak Detection Equipment (Partial List)

This list may not contain all manufactures of leak detection equipment or accurate prices. No recommendations on equipment capability is intended. This list was provided by California Department of Water Resources, Office of Water Conservation. Its reproduction here is intended to assist botanic gardens and arboreta with sources for this type of equipment and provide a general anticipated cost. The information provided may not be current and other equipment may be available.

Type Company Model Price Telephone I/state

Sonic Heath Son-i-kit $2,800 (916)371-9431 (CA)

Sonic Heath Aqua-Scope $1,800 (916)371-9431 (CA)

Sonic Fisher XLT-20 $1,650 (209)826-3292 (CA)

Sonic Fisher LT-15 $1,000 (209)826-3292 (CA)

Sonic Metrotech HL-2000 $2,800 (415)965-9208 (CA)

Sonic Metrotech 200L $1,000 (415)965-9208 (CA)

Sonic Aqua-Tronics AT-2000 $1,400 (503)363-4378 (OR)

Sonic Aqua-Tronics AT-1000 $1,000 (503)363-4378 (OR)

Sonic Fluid L-100 $2,700 (512)834-9925 (TX) Conservation Systems

Sonic Go1dak 777 $ 900 (818)240-5666 (CA)

Sonic Fuji Sangyo WL-200 $1,500 (415)357-1001 (CA)

Sonic Fuji Sangyo FSB-4L $ 800 (415)357-1001 (CA)

Acoustic Fuji Sangyo LS-100 $ 350 (415)357-1001 (CA)

Acoustic Pollard Geophone $ 550 (516)746-0842 (NY)

Correlator Metravib ZF-3000 $32-40,000 (415)559-8772 (CA)

128 129

(Table Continued)

Correlator Fuji LC-1000 $32,000 (415)357-1001 (CA)

Correlator FCS 2000 Series $34-43,000 (800)531-5465 (TX)

Correlator Arlat Murray III $20,000 (219)223-5714 (IN)

Correlator JRC JEK-42B $37,000 (602)272-7500 (AZ) APPENDIX F Vendors and Manufactures of Water saving Devices

The following list was established by California's Department of Water Resources, Office of Water Conservation. It is a listing of vendors and manufactures which in the past have either sold or manufactured water saving products, particularly retrofitting products.

Alsons Corporation A. W. Cash Valve Mfg. 42 Union street P. o. Box 191 Hillsdale, MI 49242 Decatur, IL 62525 (517) 439-1411 (217) 422-8574

Alsons Corporation Cecil B. Cox Enterprises 525 E. Edna Place P. O. Box 951 Covin, CA 91723 Palm Springs, CA 92262 (213) 966-1668 (714) 324-2480

American standard Central Brass Mfg. Company u.S. Plumbing Products 2950 E. 55th street San Francisco District Cleveland, OH 44127 4 West Fourth Avenue (216) 833-0220 San Matea, Ca 94402 (415) 342-8621

American standard Chatham Brass Company P. O. Box 2003 P. o. Box 542 New Brunswick, NJ 08902 Linden, NJ 07036 (201) 885-1900 (201) 494-7107

AMF Cuno Chatham Brass Company 400 Research Parkway 5 Olsen Avenue Meriden, CT 06450 Edison, NJ 08820 (203) 237-5541 (201) 494-7107

130 131

Bradley Corporation The chicago Faucet Company P. o. Box 446 2100 S. Nuclear Drive Menomonee Falls, WI 53051 Des Plaines, IL 60018 (414) 251-6000 (312) 298-1140

Briggs Mfg. Company Clivus Multrum USA, Inc. 1500 N. Dale Mabry 14A Eliot street Tampa, FL 33609 Cambridge, MA 02138 (813) 871-4343 (617) 491-5820

Coast Foundry & Mfg. Eaton Corporation P. O. Box 2417 Controls Division Pomona, CA 91767 191 East North Avenue (714) 596-1883 Carol stream, IL 60187 (312) 682-8041

Colton-wartsila Inc. Ecology Products Plus Inc. 7120 Hayvenhurst Avenue Century Plaza, suite 200 Van Nuys, CA 91406 100 West Main Street (213) 994-8823 Landsdale, PA 19446 (215) 855-4383 or 4378

Con-Serv, Inc Eden Enterprises 7745 Reinhold Drive 41 Soledad Drive cincinnati, OH 45237 Monterey, CA 93940 (800) 296-0166 (408) 646~9933

Coyne & Delany Company Edwin T. Badders 1565 Avon street Extended Research and Development Charlottesville, VA 22901 P. O. Box 596 (804) 296-0166 (714) 628-3275

Crane Company Eljer Plumbingware 300 Park Avenue #3 Gateway Center New York, NY 10022 Pittsburgh, PA 15222 (212) 980-7364 (412) 471-2402

Crest/Good Mfg. Company Elkay Mfg. Company 325 Underhill Boulevard 2222 Camden Court Syosset, NY 11791 Oak Brook, IL 60521 (516) 921-7260 (312) 986-8484

Delta Faucet Company Energy House State Highway 46 West 9183 Kelvin Avenue Greensburg, IN 47240 Chatsworth, CA 91311 (812) 663-4433 (213) 709-2080 132

The Energy Man Company Garden Machine Company, Inc. Route 12B - Box 196 P. O. Box 117 Hamilton, NY 13346 Mt. Ephraim, NJ 08059 (315) 691-2835 (No Phone)

Energy Recovery Systems Inc. G & E Products, Inc. P. o. Box 233 2082 South Grand Avenue Lincroft, NJ 07738 Santa Ana, Ca 92705 (201) 842-8841 (213) 256-7552

Enviroscope, Inc. Geberit Mfg. Inc P. O. Box 2933 P. o. Box 2008 Newport Beach, CA 92663 Michigan City, IN 46360 (714) 645-4400 (219) 879-4466

Envirovac Gerber Plumbing Fixtures Corp. 1260 Turret Drive 4656 West Touhy Rockford, IL 61111 Chicago, IL 60646 (815) 654-8300 (312) 675-6570

Filterite Consumer Products Global American Corporation 5 W. Aylesbury Road P. O. Box 400 Timonium, MD 21093 El Toro, CA 92630 (410) 252-0800 (714) 533-4400

Fisher Mfg. Company Grohe America Inc. 5332 Sante FE 2677 Coyle Avenue Los Angeles, CA 90058 Elk Grove Village, IL 60007 (213) 585-0161 (312) 640-6650

Fluidmaster, Inc. In-sink-Erator P. o. Box 4264 4700 21st Street Anaheim, CA 92803 Racine, WI 53406 (714) 774-1444 (414) 552-7303

Formalabs Interbath Inc. P. O. Box 1056 427 N. Baldwin Boulevard Esconido, CA 92025 City of Industry, CA 91746 (714) 745-6423 (213) 960-1841

Jaclo Inc. Leonard Valve Company 162 Carlton Avenue 1360 Elmwood Avenue Brooklyn, NY 11205 Cranston, RI 02910 (212) 852-3906 (401) 461-1200 133

Jet Air Flush Lynwood Distribution Company, Inc. 273 s. willow P. O. Box Drawer T Rialto, CA 92376 Midland Park, NJ 07432 (714) 874-5290 (201) 447-1200

JH Industries Mansfield sanitary, Inc. 980 Rancheros Drive Mansfield Plumbing Products San Marcos, CA 92069 150 First street (714) 489-5678 Perrysville, OH 44864 (419) 938-5211 Kohler Company Moen 444 Highland Drive 377 Woodland Avenue Kohler, WI 53044 Elyria, OH 44036 (414) 457-4441 (216) 323-5481

National Water Saver Company Royal Brass Mfg. Company P. O. Box 14408 1420 E. 43rd Street Orlando, FL 32807 Cleveland, OH 44103 (305) 277-0278 (216) 361-3175 Noland Company J. A. Sexauer, Inc. 2700 Warwick Boulevard 10 Hamilton Avenue Newport News, VA 23607 White Plains, NY 10601 (804) 244-8441 (914) 682-8600 Symmons Industries Inc. u.S. Brass, Valley Faucet 31 Brooks Drive P. O. Box 37 Braintree, MA 02184 Plano, TX 75074 (617) 848-2250 (214) 423-3576 Teledyne Water Pik u.S. Water Conservation 1730 E. Prospect street Service, Inc. Ft. Collins, CO 80525 P. O. Box 3766 (303) 493-8600 Georgetown station Washington, DC 20007 (202) 547-8833 Thetford Corporation Valley Faucet, Waste Treatment Products Dive Div. of u.S. Brass P. o. Box 1285 P. O. Box 37 Ann Arbor, MI 48106 Plano, TX 75074 (313) 769-6000 (214) 423-3576 T & S Brass & Bronze Works Vanderburgh Enterprises, Inc. Route #4, Old Buncombe Road P. o. Box 138 Travelers Rest, SC 29690 Southport, CT 06490 (803) 834-4102 (203) 227-4813 134 universal Rundle Corp. Wolverine Brass Works P. O. Box 960 648 Monroe, NW New Castle, PA 16103 Grand Rapids, MI 49503 (412) 658-6631 (616) 451-2581 APPENDIX G

wilbur D. May Arboretum and Botanical Garden Fundamentals of Xeriscape

The fOllowing information includes copies of

fundamental Xeriscape information prepared by the staff of

the Wilbur D. May Arboretum and Botanical Garden, Reno, Nevada. Included are the seven fundamental steps of Xeriscaping, explanations about moderate, low and very low water regimes, and a list of drought tolerant plants which

can be grown in the Reno area. I include this information

as an example of what public gardens across the country can produce inexpensively to inform the community about water conservation.

135 136

Fundamentals of Xeriscope {Jtt ~th~r old or ~. your IOndscope con be W rno~ W()tf'r f'tfiClent S1mp~by UOhZ!l'1g:he wocer,wlSoE'concepts of X~nscope ~ith a lime ef· fJ~royt~ fan you can be on your woy to a beouoful Xens.cope Not only Will your yard look great. but Xenscope imp~~nts Will incl"l"Os.e(he vClUe ond 5011 I/'T'\p~C oflo••••..s for bett~r e::sorotlor. of selling potential at your home. W(l[~r end rmproved "'-'Cter..hoid,ng ccooc:cy of ch~ Th~ follOWingpnnoples of Xen~ooe serve as 0 sod. SorisChOthove On;onl<:moecerolSOorovld~ bostCIntroductIon Follow rhese seven steps, benehcKlI nu[~ eo planes Improve me SOlipnor to the ln5lollotlOn of any Irrigation sy5l~m

Merry people cl"l"ote their own designs Wlm "X' Muk:h(>':jplanting beds ore on ideel ~otacement ceilent n?sults.Londscope professlonols eon clso for turf cre-os.Mu\ctles cover and COOlSOil..mInImIze serve os helpful resources. They con provide od· evopocctlon. reduc~ weed growth. of'd slow ero- vice entiQue. or can develoP your pIons for yQu. SKIn..Mu~s olso provide lands.ceoe'ntere-~t PlannIng IS me most important step co a succe~tul Orgonl<:mulches ore cyplCollybark ctlias, "'-'Cod Xenscope be<:ouse!t ollows yQu to install your lond· gnndings.. or pole peelings .. InorganICmuiches In· scope In phases. wnich minimizes inl{tol ex- clude roO\ ono vonous gn:;vel produo. ~loce mulch penses. dire-aly on the SOIlor on bn?ortlable foOrlC.AVOid USIngshe~ ploStICin planting a~as. 111,1 {fWtF 6· JIl.:JC.' [) ttfff{J(ft ~ 1j,Iattr PlmtiJ- Lo.::oteturl only in OI"l"OSwhe~ It ptOVldesfunc- tionol o.nefits. Turfis best seporoteO from plofmng MoSt plantS nove 0 place In Xen~ooe. esoe<:loll,:" of trees. sht\Jbs.ground covers. ond flowering plones odopted vorieties. Numerous ottfoc:uve crees. sa chot it moy be ir"9oted seporotely. Ofter\. n.ut sht\Jbs.garden flowers. ground covef'5 end curlsore con be reploced with other. less W(lter ~nding ovoiloble to complement your Xe~ooe. Low motenols. such os ground covers. low ~te-t' d@oo mond plona. or mulches. j·tfffCi~ftf S -. .... E (i) YrnrffOft V ~1fi;'~!\egulor molnteoonce preserves the intended In mony coses. well plofY'led spnnkler ~ems con beouty of YQ#..Jt Iandscope and ~ves water E save W(lter. Fot effi<:lef't 'oIlo'Oter use. pion to imgote Oe<::ouseof chell'deSIgn. Xenscopes cen help N turl o~os seporotely from other plontlng5.. Lond· (educe mo\f'ltenonce <:050.Pruning. weeding. pro- $Cope plontings should olso be 91OV()e-dOCCOlOing per fMllizotlon. pest control. ond irngctlon system to simllor wooter needs. od~~nts further woter savings. Atwa~ woter S Turl o~os o~ best wote~t'1 with sorinldel'5 Trees. OCCOrdingto plone needs. shrucs. garden flowers. end ground covers ccn be Conroe: 10<:01protes.slonols.. ond ex:enSlon service T wou~red effiCiently With low volume dno. ~roy. or repl"e'5ef'tOUVesfor SCe<:rfiCde!olls OCCut(!"lesefun- E bubbler emitters. l\E'9uler odjust~nt of ~Ut ir· dotT\E'ntOlsond how chey con bene*': your rigotlon sySlem WIll seve you woter ond money 10noscCOi.". P S Wilbur D. May Arboretum and Botanical Garden

MODERATE WATER REGIME Meadow Xeriscape

\'/HY ARE GRASSES IMPORTANT? GRASSES AND MEADOV/S ARE BEAUTIFUL

Clesses 1KI'/f~ ') 9reotor Imoor/ance rhan any other family at flowering The seed heads and leaves at grosses come In a multitude at shaoes. ['1(;;)/'), Gia~.i.~s rlU'le a world Wide distrtoullon and tney provide toad colors and texrures, Ornamenral grosses and meadows ere gOlnlng iCI 3i·! \)1 ::)e ',',Glld ocpulallon, not to menllan silelter and torage tor popularity because they reqUIre less waler end rnalluenance Inan ·.'IIIt! 'lIl111ltJlSGild ollr dornpsTlC:Jrolj animals, In some parts or the artIer kinds of landsca;Jlng. Toll delicme seed IleGCS dcnce 'NUh :ne "·.alld . .J'lISE) llJl..:rncoo) 010 a mall) source or shelter I wind, provIde small song bllds wit/) toad ond c911(jnrman Wlttl c:lllln\Jol seasonal change. I::,. :~~,S (:I~ .;1$:) Iivinq rnllicnes. fhf?'1help conlrol soil erosion. reduce ...~:?".:.,;:;:/'~~.... - J'_ II i,:'1IIlJ',)I'.::\ Ire eXlfames unlj decreose evooorallan. ,- q;::""":!S:;~{:h ('(I~,f :,.),:{;~-:" -...:- . _.~;,I ""\:"~"Q'.~'lo.J-"" .-''-< :. iff:' ~ I'~ ~);' ;1::'::'~I' -~~_. t._ 'J ~,j.r""" •. \\1 '/10 ter Gouge :::-..c: 7' ~ ,I •..v /' ,.,l" "~ Inc ense C e~:::1 , :t-C~} ;::::~" ~nc;elmonn ~o'uce Me'snell's 5e!!:~less P.!h 'Nesiern \vtltle Pine ~~t:~/' ...- Cie~opples How to grow and establish Jo~cnese fioweltng CherlY /I' (}\~7:··') Cocl

PIOn's", Ihe Xe"~ ooe GOlcen CI. olQonaeoj ,n'o Ifue. wQle' .eOlm.s r""o I I Or(:~eld GiGH Olh~' ~QnsIOCOlflO(.1 Ihe Olher .nd Ollhe ll!!nSC::JO~Gorden oesenoe lto.e iall rescue velY lOw and lOw wOlOI 'eQ.m., InctuCed In 'he moOelCl. ·...,o'er,eo,me a;. Olonn :nCl o.e ·...,Cllt''!rflc'enl' cna ....,•• sv"""e ",~n l()tTle Clouonl :>V1'eovlle Ne'/edo Blueg,o.s I I :h", me.}1 wo:el Ifl a Xe"sco~e C'Jroen. ruri OIC1110-.••" would 09 descnt-ed os a h,<;;rtOt velY h'Cn "'at.r 'ec"ne (CON:>\CUOUSCONumPhon). SHRUBS: Water frequently until established ElJraoeen C:enberl" eUSh G:cssy 8lec\: C~()l{eCherry 10" Ounno 'he plonl ella~liihment :>9nod. Iho '001 lone should be kc::.1mCllst. Heege Cotoneaslef ;)Ionll Ihn·,e " wolered wee.,y dvnno lI1e hilI t .••o 0'0"""'0 leosonl. Ihe I\.lentor Bercerry elec' QmOlJll101 'Hare, neeceo 1\ oeoenoen' upon Oltler en\lllonmenlai :.::1:;:011.svcn CI $0" lun cnd ,o,nlell, See-;r~en Junloer '.'IenfVICllh Viburnum ReqIJlfes weekly or bi-weekly wo1er 0" ,>.r:e' IIHI pIC,II IS Nell e~/c;)llI"'\ed. wOle, ~a,.••ly cno C,!!!OI( on a "'e,!~ly 10 monthly OCI:I dlllln;;) Ihe lurn,,,., monthS, P'.)nts 'N.M."qUIle InOl1elcl. " '.,'1·,111.: i,I\_·'1 ··'ll"~ OfflCO;"1S 01 orl.1"1O"'1I',.W •• 10 IIIDr',."".", Ih. (1".'0;1. cr,nUGI'CIO"loM,

'."'';'' ~; I' It. .' It:., \.-_11 • " Wilbur D. May Arboretum and Botanical Garden

LOW WATER REGIME

Low water regime plants Requires 15· or less water per year

~Illllis III II',ISwolel leOlmc will glOW nowel and 1001< heollhy v/llh All new plcnltngs leQUlle "equen. ",lgOllOIl It,,ouph Ille (j,st and smull OI:1(lunls 01 addltlonol wo'er. The clllical elernE:nl IS second yeol. Allel 'nc second growing seoson, plo.,'s lequ,'e (:;"'I"'I',,'I(] "it'? I~I(':.Iel omounl 01 \Voler whele qnd whan .1 is j.,. 01 wOlel In addition 10 oveloge OlnO'JIlI A. lOIn/oil lI,e ,,·:'(>(P:l ll\~~lisl below Includes many wondclful plonls lor OUI exact omoun' 01 Vlolel needed is dependenl IJ:JOn olhel '~;::'t.1n ~\."l1~"'ns ellvl/onmen'al laclols. such as Ihe soil. sun and lOlnloll lr.ey ..., con survive a drought wilh very hNleadditional VlOler ".ISo.11,1cni~ III1Gaiedtwo limes a montl'i'dullng the glowing W S",ISO", 00 tREES:

:J Clobopple VJoter Gauge AuSi; •.:::~ Pine LAWNS ARE BIOLOGICAL DESERTS!! >- ° Jet"ey PI:~e Q/ o Iioney locus' While limiled lurl are':Jsdo provide Inlelcsl and vcner,' ,n a ?O/C~n r " ~('- <:).1- Bllsllecone Pine seiling. lawns OIC biologIcal deserts Lawns ,equlIe lOiS01 \'.ol~" .0 ".: Ponoerosa Pine lel'llizer, pesticIdes ond houls 01 mowing onel tflfl,rnlng lawn IS C C Q/<:) Arnur Mople wande/flJlloI people 10 USc.ploy. walk ond Sllon Howevel oilIer un 130" Glan' Sequoia landscape tleo'menls such as wildllov/els. meodo'.v Oless. tl'i:'eS, 5; Golden Rain shlubS and glound covels ole much male rnlerestir,g.- w,lI ollro::: 010 Q/>- Blue Alios Cedar wildlile and can use much lesswO'er. .c. c -u SHRUBS: 20" .~ ~ Woods Rose ~8u - 00 Dyels Gleenwood Q/ 11 Silvel !luI 0110 BellY ~-VIC Nanklll/) Chelry Eo B· ,sh POlenlillo 1't lydia Broom ~O Yucca c E

3~::J -- PERENNIAlS: 0- > Ox· eye Chamomile Q/ Polenlillo Q/ U') Evenlllg Pllmlose Bklll\tel f10wel .r 4:." (;11a : ""'f n 1(":;\lIlft(' OhIO flox #\ ~ l'II,\.l' U',I .\lU' ,\lI"foll· S' Wilbur D. May Arboretum and Botanical Garden

VERY LOW WATER REGIME

Native plants of arid & semi-arid areas

Many of the plants you see befole you Ole nalive to the Gleat BaSin Some planls ole inllOduced 110m olher deserts. FOl example, RUSSianOlive whIch is a no live of Asia has become very succcHfull" OUI serni,olld climale.

Water until plant Is established

Planls I""ve if walered slowly and deeply several limes dUllr.q the firsI two glowing scosons. lhe fool zone Sh0Uld be kepi Water Gauge moiSt. bul vlell drOlned. 1he exocl amount of waler needed IS dependenl upon other envllonmenlal facialS, slIch as Ihe soil, sun ond ,ol"foll. Plonts will benefit flam soil amendments and mulch. PERENNIALS;

Requires very little additional water Blue flO)!; 30" Fllng~ Sage Cleeplng YOIlOW lhese plonts will survive with avefage exisling rainfall oller Ihe plonll5 well established. TREES: Plants which lecelVe 1 10 3 Inches 01 walel In addition 10 Ihe avelage annllol lalnfall will {JIOWloslel and sllongel; tlowever, .Altlona CyC)rc~ mosl are capoble of surviVing on extended dlOUQIII. RU~lon Olive Roc~:yMounloln Junlnel 10 lind oul how much wale, Is being applied In your garden. Catalpa place oul a number of SlfClgt,1Sided conlalnels and fun Ihe Single, leaf Pinyon sprinklers lor one hOUl._lht!(\;-meoSOce'1he-amounl 01 waler in each conlOlnor. odd these nllmbers up onq .dIVldo by the 10101 SHRUBS: numbe, 01 conlOlnen- .lhls-will-glve·youon ovelOge outpul of YOUfsystem. Use Ihls as a guide 10fyour watenng schedule. Soli CedOl or lam:Jllsk Cht1 Rose Four·ltllng Saltbush V/ec~")I(·.g $IGellafl Pcostuub Bog SogCIJI\JSh Caclus [c'~'J!>.:J:::.I,OllQlln·OC'1'(',('llcQulled A_ PIece olllluol 'o~\IOn • e' 140

TREES Acer ~inna1a Alnur maple Caloce~rus decurr~ns Inc e :-.•.-e c e dar Catalpa bignonioides Umbrella tr~e Catalpa speciosa Northp.rn ::atJlpa Cedrus Atlantica Clauc~ Atlas cedar Celtis reticulata Western? Hackberry Crataegus crus gal1i Cockspur thor:l Cupressus ariz{lnica Ari;:ona cypress Elaeaguus ~ngustifolia Russian Olive For~stierft neo~exicana Desert 01 ive Fraxinus pennsy1vanica Marshall Marshall's seedless ~zh Fraxinus pennsyivanica Kindred KIndred ash G1.:!ditsia trlacallthos Honeylocust Gleditsia tr1acanthos in~rmis Skyline Thornless Honey1ocust Juniperu3 ncopulorum Rock] Moulltain Juniper Koelreuteria paniculata Go ldel1-Rain tree Malus sp. Picea enge1mallnii Engelmann spruce

Picea pungens glauca B IIJ~ -.;pruce Pinus aristata Bristlecone pine Pinus ~dulis Pinyon pine Piuus jeffrey,i Jeffrey pine Pinus ~nophylla Single-leaf pinyon Pinus monticnla Western white pine Pinus nigra Austrian pine Pinus ponderosa Ponderosa pine Prunus x blireiana Blireiana plum Pru:ws ceras if era thutldercloud Thund~rcloud plum Prunus yedoeusis Japanese flowering cherry Robinia pseudo~cacta umbraculifera Globe bl~ck locust Sequoid~ndron giganteum Giant Sequoia T1i1a cordata Creenspire Little-leaf linden 141

SHRUBS Amelanchier alnifolia Serviceberry Aronia melanocarpa elata Glossy black chokecherry Artemisia tridentata vaT. tridE:ntata Big sagebrush Atriplex canescens Four-wing saltbush t Berberis mellt~rensis Mentor Barberry Caragana arborescens Pendula Weeping siberian peashrub Cotoneaster acutifollus Hedge cotoneaster Fallugia paradoxa Apache-plume Genista lydia Genista tinctorla Dyer's greenwood Juniperus chinensis SeaGreen SeaGreen juniper Juniperus ~hlnensls Armstrongii Ar~strong juniper Pontentilla frutlcosa Prunus tom«utosa Nanking cherry Rhus trilobata Skunkbuslt Rosa Woodsi! Woods rose Shepherdia argentea Silver 3uffalo Berry Tamarix ramosissima su~erglow Salt cedar or tamarisk Viburnum opulus Europ~an cranberry bush Viburnum trilobum wentworth Wentworth viburnum 142

FORBS Achillea millefolium Yarrow Anthemis tinctoria Ox-eye chamomile Artemisia frigida Fringe sage Linum perenne lewiaii Blue flax Gaillan.ia sp. Blanket flower POlentilla verna Cinquefoil

GRASSES Dactylis glomerata Orchard grass Festuca arundinacea Tall fescue Poa (levadcl1sis Nevada bluegrass APPENDIX H

Innovative and Alternative Onsite sewage Disposal

Ten basic types of onsite sewage disposal systems are being evaluated by the Maryland Department of the Environment. The systems are designed to overcome site limitations involving high water tables, shallow soils over fractured bedrock and slow permeable soils and also to provide better pretreatment prior to soil absorption and groundwater discharge. All following information was obtained from the Maryland Department of the Environment, Annapolis, Maryland.

1. Sand Hound. This system consists of a double- compartment septic tank, pump, pumping chamber and an absorption bed elevated above the natural soil surface in a suitable sand fill. Septic tank effluent is pumped into the bed through a pressure distribution network. Treatment occurs as effluent moves downward through the sand fill and into the underlying soil. This system has been studied intensively by a number of investigators and states throughout the country. The Wisconsin site criteria and design are the most accepted and are currently used in this program.

2. Shallow Pressure Dosinq Trench. This system consists of a double-compartment septic tank, pump, pumping chamber and soil absorption trenches. The trenches generally range between 0.5 and 2.0 feet in width, 1.0 and 1.5 feet in depth and are excavated with a ditch- witch. This system has been studied primarily by North Carolina and several other states. This system allows shallow placement in the soil to maintain two feet of greater treatment zones below the bottom of trenches. Pressure dosing provides uniform distribution of effluent throughout the trenches and dosing and resting cycles. Soil absorption trenches can be backfilled with sand instead of gravel in order to improve treatment prior to discharge to the soil. 3. Elevated Bed. This system consist of a double- compartment septic tank, pump, pumping chamber, and an

143 144

absorption bed placed at grade, elevated above the soil surface. This system is similar to the sand mound except no sand is required. This system has been studied and used in Wisconsin but not as extensively as sand mounds. 4. Alternatinq Fields. This system consists of a double- compartment septic tank, diversion valve, and two soil absorption fields. Wastewater is diverted to each field alternately, allowing one to rest and be rejuvenated by biodegradation of the clogging mat. It has been reported that this system will extend the design life of the soil absorption field and would allow each field to be designed with twenty five percent less effective soil absorption area. Very little data are available to support this claim. These systems are being evaluated to overcome site limitations of slowly permeable soils. 5. Sand Lined Trenches. This system consists of a double compartment septic tank and soil absorption trenches. The trenches are constructed to discharge directly to groundwater but are backfilled with sand fill instead of gravel. The trenches may be elevated above the original land surface in an impermeable fill area in order to obtain adequate hydraulic head for performance when the water table is high. This system has been used in Maryland to overcome site limitations of nearby impermeable soils with high water tables and sandy substratum material. 6. Sand Filter Trenches. These systems consist of a double-compartment septic tank, pump, pumping chamber, sand filter, and soil absorption trenches. Design include buried, free-access and recirculating sand filters that incorporate a variety f modifications to reduce nitrogen, phosphorus, and fecal coliforms. These systems are designed to overcome limitations of high ground water and nearly impermeable soils. 7. Bermed Infiltration Pond. A bermed infiltration pond is an excavation approximately eight to ten feet deep with no less than 10,000 square feet in surface area. The excavation exposes a water-bearing substratum overlain by an impermeable soil. Part of the excavated material is placed around the pond perimeter to form a berm. The water from the substratum rises and falls in the pond in accordance with seasonal fluctuations in the water table. septic tank effluent is discharged 145

near the bottom of the pond for disposal. The biological organisms in the pond complete the treatment process and the water moves into surficial groundwater surrounding the pond or evaporates. 8. Artificial Marsh. This system consists of a septic tank and constructed marsh-rock filter. The microbial rock-marsh filter utilizes vascular aquatic plants, such as common reed, to provide additional treatment of septic tank effluent prior to discharge to surface waters or Evapotranspiration absorption systems (ETA). 9. Evapotransoiration Absorotion System. This system consists of a septic tank or aerobic treatment unit with discharge to an evapotranspiration absorption bed (ETA) or enclosed greenhouse system. Complete reliance on evapotranspiration to handle generated wastewater is generally not possible in Maryland on a year round basis.

10. Graywater Disoosal System. This system consists of utilizing a composting or incinerator toilet to eliminate the blackwater component of the wastewater stream and utilizing some combination of soil absorption or ETA system for disposal of graywater. Graywater hydraulic loading rates are double the rates used for septic tank effluent and therefore require less system area. APPENDIX I

Solar Aquatic septaqe Treatment system

The following is a copy of a 1989 executive summary which evaluates the solar aquatic septage pilot treatment system and technology.

146 147

EXECUTI VE SUI1t1ARY

HARWICH SEPTAGE TREATMENT PILOT STUDY EVALUATION OF TECHNOLOGY FOR SOLAR AQUATIC SEPTAGE TREATMENT SYSTEM

FOR ECOLOGICAL ENGINEERING ASSOCIATES FALMOUTH, MA

APRil 1989

NOltE ••• d ASSOCIAtES c..c-/~/~ 148

IIARWICII SCP1AGE TREAH1ENT PILOT STUDY EVAlUA TlON or TECIlNOlOGY FOR SOLAR AQUATIC SEPTAGE TREATMENT SYSTEM

occur I VE SU~IHARY

INTRODUCTION In the sunvner and fall of 1988. the Harwich septage treatment pi lot study was operated by Ocean Arks International to evaluate the applicability of solar aquaculture/constructed wetlands to treat septic tank pumpage (septage). The goal of the pilot study was to determine whether a combined aquaculture/constructed wetland system could reduce pollutants in septage to acceptable level; allowing safe return of the treated effluent to groundwater aquifers.

OVERVIEW or TREATMENT PROCESS The septage treatment pilot plant was comprised of a series of three ecological units. including (1) an aerated aquatic treatment step, (2) a constructed wetland, and (3) a final aquaculture treatment step. (See figure I).

lHflUCMl' rl~O" $(I'UC( UCOOM (-1.200 CI'O. )

COf(sfltucno '«t"T\»CO (u"O'" t" fl.) ~

TR(.\1(D (rn.V(Mt

SCHEMATIC PLAN VIEW ncvttL t NO SCAl[ tu.RWICH S(PTACC TR(ATW(NT (XP(IU&./(NT 149

Septage Storage lagoon Septage was broug/lt to the site by septage hauling trucks and discharged into an existing lagoon. Septage was pumped from the lagoon at a rate of 2 gpm using a sump pump suspended approximately 5 ft below the lagoon surface; the lagoon was 8 to 10 ft deep. Aerated Aquatic Treatment: Tanks'l - 10 Support racks were installed in the upper portion of the tanks for plants, and each tank was planted with a selection of woody plants, aquatic plants and pond weeds. Each tank was aerated using a submerged fine bubble diffuser. The tanks were seeded with a commercial mixture of bacteria including the following: Bacillus, Pseudomonas, Nitrobacter, Nitrosomonas, Celumonas, Aerobacter, and Rhodopseudomonas. All tanks were stocked with several varieties of snails including Lymnaedae (right hand) and Planorbidae (ramshorn). Constructed Wetland (Harsh) The plants chosen for the wetlands included reeds, bulrush, willow and cattail. All of these have the ability to transfer oxygen to their roots. This effectively supports the microbial populations immediately surrounding the roots. Aquaculture Polishing System: Tanks '11 - 21 Tanks 11 to 21 contained higher plant and animal species. Plankton were intro- duced at tanks 11 and 12. The reason for including fish and snails in the system was twofold. 1) The included species are algae grazers. They grazed the tank sides, keeping the algal growth vigorous and allowing new algal growth close to the tank walls where sunlight was most abundant. 2) They served as sentinel organisms that would warn of system failures that allowed toxic compounds through to the effluent. System Volume and Oetention Time Each tank held approximately 600 gal and the constructed marsh, filled with coarse sand, held approximately 220 gal of water for a total treatment system volume of approximately 13,000 gal. The estimated detention time through the entire system averaged 13 days with a weekday flow of 1,200 gpd. System effluent was recycled into tank 1 at a rate of 10~ by volume. RESULTS OF PILOT TEST PROGRAM The strength of the septage applied to the treatment system at Harwich was in the range of 1,000 to 1,500 mg/l BOD. BOD loading was above 10 lb/d during the lest period. The BOO loading on the first lank averaged 13.4 lb/d or 158 lb/d per 1,000 cu. ft of tank volume. This loading is similar to a high rate activated sludge loading. The performance of the pilot plant with respect to specific constituents is reviewed below. BOO Removal The BOO removal efficiency through the first 10 tanks was approximately 95~. Removal ;n the marsh and tanks 11 to 21 brought removal to 99+~. 150

Suspended Solids Removal Removal in the marsh and tanks 11 to 21 brought total suspended solids removal to 98+ '- Nitrogen Removal Nitrification and denitrification cycles were active as evidenced by the net removal of 85 to 98t of the nitrogen mass. Phosphorus Removal Removal of phosphorus ranged from 18% to 26% through the first 10 tanks and 43~ to 95% through the entire system. Volatile Organic Compound Remov~l Fourteen of the fifteen Volatile Organic Compounds (VOCs) on the EPA primary list were present in the septage influent but not in the effluent. The system removed VOCs such as toluene, methylene chloride, and 1,l-0ichloroethane. Bioassay of fish 1iver enzymes was used as primary evidence that aromatic hydrocarbons, PCB's and dioxins were removed from the septage. Coliform Bacteria Removal Total coliform and fecal coliform reductions were significant through the system. Concentrations of 10,000,000 /100 mL were reduced to 200,000 for total coliforms and similarly 2,000,000 1100 mL to 10,000 / 100 mL for fecal coliforms. When the system was functioning optimally in midsummer, effluent values were <1,000 for total and <10 for fecal coliforms. Herbicides and Pesticides Herbicide and pesticide concentrations were below detection limits in the treatment system. Only 4,4 -000, a breakdown product, was found in the beginning of the marsh at 0.19 ppm but was removed before the end of treatment. Halocarbons, Hydrocarbons and Volatiles In a sample at the end of the experiment, 1,1,2 trichloroethane (purgeable haloc~rl>ol1), toluene and 1,4 oil:hlorouC;-Ilz.~ne(purgcable aromatic) welOc detected in tank II. The contents of tanks III and f19 were free of these compounds. Metals Metals were assayed in the bottom sludge at the end of the experiment (November 1988). Water samples were not analyzed for metals during the experiment. Copper was present in the sludge from tank 1 at a concentration of 2,300 mg/kg. However, fish flesh and livers from fish in the downstream end of the facility had low levels of metals. Silver, mercury and chromium were relatively high in the septage sludge samples; they were relatively low in fish flesh and livers. 151

Sludge Production On the basis of the sludge remalnlng in the aquaculture tanks at the time of the system dismantling, the sludge production from the suspended growth, sloughing of attached growth, and inert solids amounted to approximately 26 lb dry weight. Based on TSS loading inert solids into the system were approximately 100 lbs. Sludge production in the system was substantially less than that found in typical activated sludge wastewater treatment plants. SUMMARY OF TREATMENT PERFORMANCE In general, the system, at the loading rates used, removed BOO and TSS very efficiently. The principal performance data are summarized below. Table 1 OVERALL TREATMENT PERFORMANCE OF AQUACULTURE/ CONSTRUCTED WETLAND AT HARWICH'

CONSTITUENT INFLUENT, EFFLUENT, PERCENT mQ/L moIL REMOVED

BOO 1,296 5.3 99.6 TSS 421 5.4 98.0 Total N 164 12.8 92.2 Total P 27.6 9.6 65.2

Based on data from Day 58 (Aug. 12) to Day 96 (Sept. 19) when flow was 1,200 gpd and.hydraulic detention time was about 12 days. CONCLUSIONS The septage treatment system reviewed in this report has some very interesting features which may lead to the development of a cost effective and innovative process for septage treatment. The principal conclusions derived from this review are related to (1) solar/aquaculture process (2) BOD removal, (3) nitrogen removal, (4) phosphorus removal, (5) solids removal, (6) volatile organic compounds and bacteria, and (7) solids disposal. Solar/Aquaculture Process Based on the results of this pilot study, it is clear that the solar aquatic system as a sept age treatment process is effective and promises to be an economi- cal means suitable for many other sites with similar goals and conditions. BOD Removal BOD was effectively removed in the first 10 aquaculture tanks. Effluent BOO concentrations averaged about 5 mg/l. Removal efficiency for BOO appears to be at 152

the high end of the range known for sewage treatment by other aquatic plant systems. Nitrogen Removal Significant nitrogen removal (over 92~) occurred in the system. There is strong indication from the data collected at system dismantling that nitrogen ~ be removed through alternating nitrification and denitrification steps, but longer- term study is required. Phosphorus Removal Phosphorus removal averaged 65~. higher than expected for both wetlands and aqua- culture systems, where phosphorus removal is typically 30 to SOr.. The major removal mechanisms for phosphorus are adsorption, precipitation and plant uptake if the plants are harvested frequently. Volatile Organic Compounds and Bacteria Removal of volatile organic compounds and col iform bacteria was efficient. Substantial removal of these pollutants was occurring with the system. The mechanism for voe removal may involve a sequence of anoxic and aerobic conditions in the system. Solids Removal Total suspended solids loading were low compared to a system that would treat raw septage rather than the influent that was used. Solids Disposal Collection, treatment and disposal of sludge from the bottom of the tanks are design and cost items which must be addressed. Metals may accumulate in the bottom sludges and may affect the Quality of compost that can be generated from the sludge. Disposal of plant biomass needs to be designed for a full-scale operation. APPENDIX J

List of Gardens, Institutions, and Water Agencies contacted and/or visited During Research Period

Gardens Visited

Arizona - Senora Desert Museum and Garden Tucson, Arizona

Baltimore Zoo Baltimore, Maryland Brookside Gardens Wheaton, Maryland

Davis Arboretum (University of California at Davis) Davis, California Desert Botanic Garden Phoenix, Arizona

Filoli Gardens Woodside, California Huntington Botanical Garden San Marino, California Los Angeles State and County Arboretum Arcadia, California Longwood Gardens Kennett Square, Pennsylvania Morris Arboretum Philadelphia, Pennsylvania National Arboretum Washington, D.C.

153 154

Norfolk Botanical Garden Norfolk, Virginia

Phoenix Zoo Phoenix, Arizona

Rancho Santa Ana Botanic Garden Claremont, California Santa Barbara Botanic Garden Santa Barbara, California

Strybing Arboretum San Francisco, California wilbur May Arboretum and Botanic Garden Reno, Nevada winterthur Museum and Gardens Winterthur, Delaware

Institutions vistited

Biosphere II, Oracle Arizona. Blue Plains Wastewater Treatent Facility, Washington, DC. Robert & Catherine Wilson Botanical Garden, Las Cruces, San vito, Costa Rica. Solar Aquatic Wastewater Treatment Plant, Providence RI. Solar Aquatic Septage Treatment Plant, Harwich, MA. university of Arizona, School of Arid Land Studies.

Institutions Contacted

California Department of Water Resources Delaware Department of Health & Environment - Office of Environmental Control Delaware River Basin Commision

Environmental Defense Fund 155 Inland Water Directorate of Environment, (Canada) Johns Hopkins University, School of Geography and Environmental Engineering Jewish National Fund, (Israel)

Kentucky Department of Environmental Protection - Division of Water

Maryland Department of Natural Resources, Water Conservation Project National Climatic Data Center National Xerioscape Council

New England River Basin Commision

New York Department of Environmental Conservation potomic River Basin Commision

Tennessee Department of Health & Environment - Office of Water Management

Virginia Water Control Board

University of Arizona, Office of Arid Land Studies University of Delaware, Cooperative Extension Service

University of Nebraska, Office of Agricultural Meteriology

U.s. Geological Survey U.s. Army Corp of Engineers Worldwatch Institute APPENDIX K

THE HOW, WHAT, AND WHERE OF WATER

Throughout history, water, more than any other resource, has profoundly affected the course of development and influenced the quality of life experienced by all. In general, this most valued resource appears to be taken for granted by society today. Members of our society are seldom aware of water's origin beyond the faucet, its uses, and where it goes at the end of the drain.

This chapter will explain the role water plays in botanic gardens and arboreta, how it is obtained, its use in public horticultural facilities, where it goes after it is used, and problems facing our water supplies. Prior to this, however, it is important to address why water is so valuable, review its historic role, and subsequent regulation in the united states.

A. The Value of Water Water's unique attributes are intrinsic to all life processes. A human baby born into the world is 90 percent

156 157 water and other fluid in volume. 1 We tend to dry out a bit as we grow older, but humans are still mostly water. Water is not only a major component of humans but flows in the veins and roots of all organisms. It is a highly reactive substance, an effective solvent, and efficient transporter.

Water has been described as the universal solvent.

Many substances, both mineral and organic, dissolve in it. Weathering and decomposition of minerals and rocks are caused by it. Nutrients in the soil and in plants are transported with it. Humans as well as other animals use it to move vital nutrients and oxygen in their bodies. Water also carries away the wastes of our bodies, industries, and cities. Because of its solvent properties, water may contain harmful concentrations of dangerous substances. Hence the importance of considering the quality as well as the quantity of water available for human, animal, plant, and industrial use.

The properties which make water indispensable to life also make it invaluable for industry. As a consequence, it is the most heavily used of our natural resources; there is not a single manufactured item in our homes which did not require water for its production. The steel in a typical washing machine took roughly 4,500 gallons to produce; the 158 rayon in the living room carpet required approximately 50,000 gallons. The family car has a water investment of about 100,000 gallons, plus another 200 or so gallons of water every time the gas tank is filled. The few grams of gold in the average wedding ring required as much as 2,500 gallons. A sugar processing plant uses roughly four million gallons per day; a plastic plant, 180,000; a large brewery, as much as fifteen million. A coal fired power plant uses about 900 gallons of water for every kilowatt-hour of electricity produced; not including the water used to mine and process the coal. All told, industrial manufacturing and energy production in the continental United states uses a total of 140 billion gallons of water every day, or about 600 gallons for every man, woman, and child in this country per day.2

The average American on a daily basis runs approxi- mately ninety gallons of water through the faucets of their home. Add to this the 600-gallon industry and energy allotments per person per day and we have a total of 690 gallons. This is just the beginning, for this does not include food production.

Agriculture in the United states through modern farming techniques is producing an enormous quantity of food, due, 159 for the most part, to irrigation. A bushel of wheat represents a water investment of 15,000 gallons. To raise a steer to a thousand pounds requires 3.5 million gallons of water. A single egg requires an investment of 250 gallons before it could reach the breakfast plate. All told, the water required to put an average day's food on the table for a family of four comes to almost 3,200 gallons, enough to fill a small swimming pool. The weight of the food consumed

is approximately twenty-four pounds; the weight of the water just under thirteen tons.3

When agricultural, industrial, energy, and domestic needs are collectively considered, the per-capita water use as a nation turns out to be approximately 1,700 gallons per day per person.

A.l. The Hydrologic Cycle

The important attributes of water also have far reaching effects on the global climate. Heat stored in the oceans, lakes, and other open bodies of water help regulate temperature fluctuations. Condensed water vapor forms masses of clouds, which are then transported around the globe by wind. The clouds distribute their condensed moisture in the form of rain or snow, regulating surface temperature and recharging water sources. 160

The majority of the moisture in clouds comes from ocean evaporation. Water constantly circulates from the sea, to and through the atmosphere, to the land and eventually returns to the seas by stream flow and to the atmosphere from the sea and land surface by way of transpiration and evaporation. This circulation pattern is termed the

"hydrologic cycle" and has been described as a gigantic distillation machine. It is the basis for movement of all water available for human use. (see Figure K.l p.161)

When precipitation falls on land surfaces, some water runs over the land in streams and rivers, back to the ocean or other surface bodies. However, most of the water sinks into the ground, which is porous and capable of transmitting water. Ground water does not occur beneath the surface of the earth the way we see it occurring on the surface. There are no underground rivers, lakes, or streams. Rather, ground water is found in aquifers, which are simply permeable saturated zones of rock. Water in the aquifer moves in a orderly, predictable pattern, called laminar flow. All ground water is in transit to some point of discharge such as a stream or river, on its way back to the oceans. 161

- ~-- , -. PrC'C1PjiU,UOft j I F.\-aponllOft .i'llk W1inl

Figure K.14 Earth's Hydrologic Cycle Water is present in many different forms everywhere on earth. Its liquid form is the most abundant substance.

Oceans, seas, and lakes cover more than two-thirds of the

Earth's surface. However, most of this water is not available for human use, as most of it is tied up in non- potable forms. The oceans hold 97.5% of the Earth's total water resource. Glaciers and ice caps hold 1.8% of this resource and 0.6% is in the soil or rocks. The remaining forms of water are found in lakes, rivers, vegetation and the atmosphere, less than 0.5% of the total resource.5 162 B. The Gift of Safe Water: the Historic Role The developed countries of the world have become accustomed to safe reliable water. Few homes are not connected to a reliable water source. The familiar sound of a washing machine, dish washer, toilet, bath, shower, lawn sprinkler, or car being washed are taken for granted in our modern society.

This apparent abundant and limitless supply of pure water is with us at all times of the day. It has allowed us to raise what was considered luxurious habits in the past, to the status of norms today. It has also allowed our society to forget that the conquest of water is a recent accomplishment, not realized until the twentieth century.

B.l. The Need for Water Development It was between 1770 and 1900 that most major technical developments took place, which shaped modern water technology. 6 There were several reasons for this development; foremost was the need to provide water for an increasing population that was concentrated in cities and towns. There also was demand by developing industry for more water. However, because of increasing population and expanding industries, human health considerations became a primary force for development of new te~hnology. 163

Prior to the American Revolution, cities and towns obtained water from nearby streams, wells, and springs. These sources became overburdened and contaminated as populations grew. Concerns for public health, ever present fire danger, and developing industry prompted the search and development of new water sources. By the 1840's, the development of publicly owned water systems was established in the united states and most other currently developed nations.?

B.2. Municipal Water System Development The first American municipal water works was built in 1754 by Hans Christopher Christianson for the Moravian settlement of Bethlehem, Pennsylvania. Water from a spring was forced by a pump through bored hemlock logs into a wooden reservoir, providing the town with water.

Philadelphia was the first major American city to complete a water works and municipal distribution system. In 1744 a visitor to Philadelphia reported there was "plenty of excellent water in this city, there being a pump at almost every fifty paces" in the streets.!

A system of fountains and hand pumps, supplied either by wells or a municipal distribution system, remained the mainstay of most town and city water systems until the mid- 164 nineteenth century. By the 1860's, however, many urban wells were abandoned because of failure or contamination. stream and river sources were also becoming contaminated because of pollution due to population increases and industrial development. Concentration in the water of fecal coliform and fecal streptococcal bacteria lead to outbreaks

of typhoid and cholera during this period. Water quality in major industrialized countries had, in general, deteriorated seriously.9 It would not be until 1914 that Baltimore,

Maryland would construct the first sewage treatment plant in America to address this problem.10

During this period various medical committees were established to analyze water supplied to the public. In the Impasse de la Porte Bleue in Brussels the following was written: the water is lemon yellow in color, with a very faint marshy odor and insipid taste; it is clear and does not become cloudy until it has stood for three or four days, when it leaves a slight whitish-grey deposit on the sides of the container. When boiled, it gives off an unpleasant smell and the surface becomes covered with a pearly film slightly tinged with blue.'1

In Paris, an expert of the period concluded that barely ten percent of the water drawn from fountains in the city was drinkable.'2 In New York, citizens complained bitterly at paying high prices for impure water they received. News- 165 paper correspondence of this period ridiculed the complacency of those who pretended the city's water was pure.13

By the early 1880's, many cities and towns were experiencing a water crisis caused by increased population, water source pollution, leaks in distribution systems, rise

in industrialization, and an increase in per capita withdrawals. This crisis set the stage for development of our modern water networks. New sources of water had to be found and developed; often they were more than one hundred miles from where they were needed. Filtration was developed to purify water prior to distribution. New distribution techniques and materials were developed for greater efficiency. Treatment for waste water was begun to reduce pollution.

Despite new developments which have continued to the present, there is a race between water supply and consumption. New York City in the past 160 years has created a water supply system that drains more than 2,000 square miles of land 75 to 125 miles away from the city and provides storage for 548 billion gallons. The average daily consumption in the city and communities that draw water from the New York system is more than 1.5 billion gallons. To 166 insure the water is pure, a large inspection force patrols the watersheds to detect and abate contamination sources.

As water leaves the reservoirs, it is disinfected with chlorine to destroy bacteria, copper sulfate to kill algae, and coagulants to promote clarity. The distribution systems include two, 20 to 24 foot diameter tunnels from the reservoirs more than 75 miles away, and a third tunnel to be completed soon. six thousand miles of water mains move water around the city, and 95,000 hydrants provide fire protection. There are more than 820,000 service connections and 170,000 gate valves. The waste water treatment facilities treat and discharge more than a billion gallons of effluent a day. Development of this highly sophisticated water supply system is one of the paramount public works achievements of the nineteenth and twentieth centuries.'4 still, the race between supply and consumption continues, not only for New York but for most other united states cities and towns.

B.3. Water Development in the Western united states

The western united states as we know it today would not exist if not for a century and a half of messianic efforts. Public funding in excess of sixty billion dollars has made possible the mammoth manipulation of water in the west.

More than 1200 major dam projects have allowed for the 167 capture of rivers, rain, and snow melt. Water from these dams and storage reservoirs are re-routed hundreds of miles in concrete aqueducts to cities and farms, which are located in ares that receive less than twenty inches of natural rain annually. In the case of Los Angeles, Phoenix, EI Paso, and

Reno, less than seven inches of natural rain fall annually.

Since the beginning of the twentieth century, the United states Bureau of Reclamation has built in the western united states the highest and largest dams in the world.

Rivers formally believed undammable have been dammed. The Colorado, Sacramento, Columbia, and lower Snake rivers have all been tapped. Their waters run in aqueducts for hundreds of miles across deserts, over mountains, and through the Continental Divide. They irrigate millions of acres, and provide water and power for a population equal that of Italy.15

After the major dams of the west were completed, in addition to providing irrigation water they generated an abundance of surplus electricity. This helped continue development of western cities, but more importantly allowed pumping of ground water for additional agricultural, industrial, and human development. 168 Ground water in the west, for the most part, comes from the legacy of the ice age and the glacial melt. It is the main source of water which has turned western plains and a

large portion of California and Arizona into the major farming areas of the United states. This includes portions

of the united states called the dust bowl during the great drought of the 1930's.16

C. Water Law in the united states

To deal with conflicts among water users, three types

of water law arose in the united states: riparian rights, prior appropriation, and a hybrid system which contains

elements of both riparian and appropriation law. The riparian rights system is found in eastern states and is based on the English system. This system assigns rights of water use to land owners, and requires equal sharing among users in times of shortage. The appropriation system, dominant in Western united states, by contrast, allows the

severance of water use rights from land ownership. Available water is allocated in order of priority, so that senior appropriators, whose water rights predate other area water appropriators, may be satisfied during dry periods at the expense of those who's rights are junior to them. Ten of the semi-arid western states use a hybrid system which has elements of both riparian and appropriation law. In 169 these hybrid systems however, the appropriation system tends to predominate. Most states have departed from strict doctrine of the system enough to establish water management agencies which allocate rights and regulate water use by permits. Colorado is the sole western state in which a permit system has not been imposed.17

D. Botanic Garden and Arboreta Water Source, Use, Discharqe, and Problems

How botanic gardens and arboreta get their water, use it, and discharge it can be a very complicated, involved process. In order to manage this resource more efficiently, each institution must understand specific conditions, regulations, problems, and potential problems which affect their use of this natural resource. Botanic gardens and arboreta are like all other industries when it comes to their water supply. They require a steady and predictable supply, which is capable of meeting their daily quantity and quality needs. A water supply may come from either surface or underground sources. Depending on the location of an institution, government agencies may regulate the choice of source.

D.l. Water Sources

Surface water is found in lakes, streams, reservoirs which hold snow melt or rain water run-off, and surface 170 depressions that capture and hold water. Ground water is in water-yielding geological formations (aquifers), beneath the earth's surface. The water from these sources is either purchased from a larger municipal distribution system or pumped with their own equipment, from various sources they have rights to and/or permits for.18

Water supplied to a garden is usually connected to a storage facility, distribution system, and discharge system. If the garden is supplied by a municipal water system, however, it does not require a domestic water storage facility. The institution is responsible for its own distribution system from the municipal water hook-up, and their waste water discharge system back to the municipal sewage intake.

When supplying its own water either from surface or ground water, a storage capacity is required to maintain a minimum pressure for needed flow rates. This also prevents continuous running of the supply pumps during peak consumption periods. When a well is used in the supply network, the well casing provides water storage (see Table K.l p.1?l). An intermediate storage tank improves this type of system (see Fi~ure K.2 p.172). In addition, elevated storage tanks (water towers) can be utilized to provide 171 storage capacity as well as providing water pressure for the entire system (see Figure K.3 p.173). The amount of pressure from an elevated tank depends on its height above the outlets. A relatively small pump keeps the amount of water in the tower constant. Weight of the water and height of the tower provide the required pressure for distribution and constant pressure. Pressure reducing valves are often required with this type of system, for pressure can vary depending on the distance from the tower.'9

Table K.120 storage Capacity of Well casing or Pipe

Well Storage per Well Storage per diameter foot of depth diameter foot of depth (Inches) (Gallons) (Feet) (Gallons)

2 0.163 1 5.87 3 0.367 2 23.50 4 0.653 3 52.87 5 1.02 4 94.00 6 1.47 5 146.87 8 2.61 7 287.86 10 4.08 9 475.86

0.1.1. Garden Water Distribution

Once it has left its source, water is distributed throughout the garden by means of the main loop or main supply line. This is usually cast iron pipe, but can be plastic, steel, and in older systems, terracotta or wood.

Its inside diameter varies depending on the need of the 172 garden, but tends to be between six and twelve inches. Spur lines feed off the main line, carrying water to the far corners of the institution. The pipes which finally deliver water for use in faucets and garden hoses are usually one of several types available: polyethylene (PE), polyvinyl chloride (PVC), galvanized steel, rigid copper, and flexible copper. The selection of a particular type of piping material usually was made on the basis of cost, pipe location, ease of installation, and expected working life of the system. 21

liquid level ",-A C. line Control 60x ~

f~;~tor~=1 ~ Box

~ ~II Pump Coble

~Upper Electrode . (Reset level) I

lower Electrode (low level Cut-off ) Well PumP INTERMEDIA TE STORAGE SERVICE PUMP PRESSURE TANK

t~ Mot:)r SOURCE

Fiqure K.222 Intermediate storaqe With 2-Pump System 173

D.2. Water Uses

Water has many uses in botanic gardens and arboreta.

In general, water use can be divided into two categories or

systems: domestic and non-domestic. The domestic system is

that system which carries potable water. Potable water is water which is safe for human consumption. Water provided

for safe public consumption has been chemically treated to

negate the potential for negative human health effects, or has been tested and found not to be harmful. It is used for more than just the two quarts of water the average human

requires daily. It is used for washing our hands, tools,

and equipment. Additionally, it is used for waste removal

and other sanitary needs.

Insulated Tank --Float Switch

Figure It. 323 Elevated storage Tank 174 D.3. Domestic Water system

A domestic system for public consumption in botanic gardens and arboreta has to be treated to assure that it is safe for consumption. This is true for any source of water supplied for public consumption. Gardens which pump and supply their own water often have their own water treatment facility. Water treatments include chlorine or bromine to destroy bacteria, copper sulfate to control algae, treatment to adjust pH, and corrosion inhibitors to prevent the cast iron pipes from deteriorating. Water supplied through a municipal system is treated prior to distribution.

D.4. Non-domestic Water System (Irrigation system)

The non-domestic water system mayor may not utilize potable water. Non-domestic water is water which is used in non-consumption applications. It is used for both heating and cooling, irrigation, humidity control, as well as sanitary services. Water can be utilized to make steam or hot water which in turn is piped to areas were its heat is needed. Evaporative cooling and air heat exchange systems can use recycled or non-potable water for cooling purposes. Additionally, humidity control and irrigation can be accomplished with non-potable water. In all of these non- domestic uses the quality is still important, although it does not have to meet human consumption requirements. In 175 all of the above mentioned applications, the pH of the water is usually of paramount importance. The pH effects the water chemistry, which among other things effects the working life of distribution pipes and over all plant quality.

As previously mentioned, water supplied for irrigation and ornamental fountains is usually handled differently from a domestic water supply. Often the system is separate from the domestic system, having a separate source for its water, pumps for distribution, piping for delivery, and drains for its discharge. Water used for irrigation often comes from a separate well, lakes or ponds, storm water collection basins, rivers or streams, and in some cases treated domestic supply.

Irrigation systems utilize the same basic principals of distribution which domestic systems use. There is a main loop or line which supplies the bulk of the water to the garden. Spur lines or submain lines draw their water from this main line to supply the individual gardens. Pumps are utilized to pressurize the system. Filters remove particles which otherwise would clog delivery nozzles. Pressure reducing valves prevent pipe fittings from being blown 176 apart. Back flow prevention valves prevent back siphoning into a water source (see Figure K.4 p.l??).

One difference between an irrigation system and domestic system is the use of a fertilizer injector. This system mixes a proportional amount of fertilizer with irrigation water, supplying plant nutrients when irrigating.

A wide array of valves, pumps, and filters are used for both a domestic and non-domestic water system. The most important of these, and the one which needs explanation is the backflow preventer or check valve. This valve is especially important when fertilizer injection systems are utilized or when a potable and non-potable water system uses common piping. This valve is used to protect potable water against backflow insuring that contaminated water is not mixed with water used for human internal consumption. Backflow or backsiphoning occurs when a negative pressure develops in the water supply line, causing water that has been contaminated to be drawn back into the supply line. The National Plumbing Code requires that backflow preventers be insta~led on any supply fixture when the outlet may be submerged. Examples of this include a hose that fills a spray tank, fertilizer injectors, or equipment wash tubs.24 177

SuOrt\d 1n L 1ne

Contro 1s ...... 0 •... ~=------....

lIa ter Source Secondary Solenoid Fi Iter Valve

A wCkflow preventer or vacuum breaker is required in some areas

Figure K.425 Irrigation System Components

D.5. Discharged Water (Wastewater)

Water which has been used for any of the aforementioned purposes and then discharged is referred to as waste water. Prior to stream flow or environmental release, quality of this waste water or discharged water must meet the standards set by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). These regulations must be followed by public horticultural facilities as they must by all other industries.

Institutions which are serviced by municipal water and sewage treatment have their discharged water treated and released by these agencies. However, facilities which provide their own water and waste water treatment must meet all of the EPA's regulations. 178

All water which is poured down a drain, flushed through toilets, or otherwise discharged into the environment must be filtered to remove solids and, if necessary, treated for disinfection. Small institutions which deal with relatively

small amounts of discharged water accomplish this with a simple septic tank and drain field. Larger facilities often have their own waste water treatment plant to handle large quantities of discharged water.

0.5.1. Blue Plains Wastewater Treatment Plant

Water quality engineers describe conventional waste water treatment as the "linear approach" to problem solving. This approach is a stepwise method, solving major problems first, dealing with any problems that may arise from their solution, and than continuing in this manner to solve the remaining problems.26 Blue Plains Waste Water Treatment

Plant which services Washington D.C., is a premier example of this conventional form of waste water treatment. A brief description of how this plant works will provide valuable

insight into what happens to water when it goes down a drain or is used to flush a toilet.

Wastewater treatment begins with twin feed lines into the plant. These pipes are large enough to accommodate an eighteen-wheel truck, and have steel bar screens with one 179 inch openings. These bars separate large suspended solids, which would include tree limbs, cans, old shoes, and any other large objects washed into storm sewers or flushed down toilets. At this point, the raw sewage is approximately 97 percent water and 3 percent solids.27

Past the bar screens, the sewage moves into deep concrete header channels. Here grit, sand, and gravel settles out of the water. From these concrete tunnels the sewage moves into circular concrete ponds, one hundred feet in diameter. Further settling out of solids occurs here, in what are called settling ponds. Additionally, a mechanical grease and oil skimmer revolve around the surface of each pond, removing petroleum products from the surface. These ponds are the final stage in the physical cleansing process known as primary sewage treatment.28

The next step at Blue Plains and other conventional treatment facilities, involves the use of biological and chemical agents. The waste water is moved from primary treatment ponds to dozens of long, narrow channels covering several acres. Giant aeration pumps churn the water till it appears to be boiling. Here, microbes that feed on oxygen and suspended waste attack existing dissolved solids which remain after primary treatment. Much care is given to these 180 microbes, the object being to provide just enough oxygen and suspended waste to keep them hungry but not starved. Water in these secondary treatment channels is blown so full of oxygen, that if a person fell in he or she would sink to the bottom, unable to swim out.~

Water is moved from these aeration channels into other waterways, where chemicals are added to precipitate out any suspended solids the microbes have missed. Ferric chloride and "pickle liquor" are used for this flocculation process. Chlorine, a disinfectant, is also added to the water. This is the secondary treatment point of detoxification, the point where most treatment plants worldwide discharge their treated waste water (effluent)~~

Blue Plains has additional steps in their treatment process. Following secondary treatment, waste water flows into a section of the plant where it undergoes nitrification. Nitrification does not remove waste; rather it converts elements of waste to more stable forms, essentially making it inert and harmless. Nitrification costs more to operate than both primary and secondary treatments combined and is one reason more wastewater treatment facilities do not use it.31 181

The filtration building is the last stage in Blue

Plain's treatment process. Wastewater entering this building appears clear as tap water. The water is forced through massive filters containing two feet of crushed anthracite, one foot of fine sand, and a layer of almandite. After a batch of waste water has passed through these filters, they are backwashed. Nearly eight tons of additional solids, in the form of black mud, are removed from these filters each day. From this point water is released into the river.

The cost of constructing wastewater treatment plants is enormous. To construct a facility like Blue Plains costs in excess of 1 billion dollars.32 Dealing with and paying for waste water treatment is one of many problems facing botanic gardens and arboreta as well as society as a whole.

E. WATER PROBLEMS: AN OVERVIEW

Poor management, lack of adequate conservation, pollution, rapid localized increases in demand, decline of water infrastructure, and the fiscal restraints being faced by all levels of government are all creating alarming water problems. These problems are found in both water-rich and water-poor areas of the world, including the united States.

This section will identify both global and national water 182 problems. Highlighted will be problems which will directly or indirectly affect botanic gardens and arboreta.

All current water problems will affect botanic gardens and arboreta either directly or indirectly. Additionally, all water quantity and quality related problems will most certainly increase the cost for this resource. The March 2,

1986, Sunday Chicago Tribune stated the following:

Old ways of thinking about the allocation and costs of water are being challenged, and our approaches to water development and use are going to have to change. In fact, the relationship between water cost and scarcity is going to be a major resource issue for the rest of the century.D

Although even the driest areas of the united states will not soon run out of water, there is little that can be managed as a low cost resource.

Our nation as a whole is in a fundamental shift in its approach to water problems. There are no longer easy answers to problems of quantity and quality of water. Edwin

H. Clark II, senior associate of the Conservation Foundation said: There is no more cheap water available. It is more expensive to get the supply, move it to where you need it, and more e~ensive to clean it up after you have used it.3 183

The problem of underpricing water in the past has actually

lead to many of our current problems. Common sense tells us that people waste commodities they do not value highly, or commodities, though valued highly, are supplied cheaply. In all parts of this country, water prices have historically been extremely low.

E.l. World-Wide Problems

Around the world, fresh water is very unevenly distributed.35 Currently, much of the Middle East, most of

Africa, parts of Central America, and the Western United states are experiencing water shortages.~ These shortages are a result of several factors, including limited supplies, heavy demands, and inefficient use. By the year 2000, it is estimated that many developing countries will have only half as much available water per capita as they had in 1975.37

Many will experience greater demands on these existing water supplies from expanded agricultural and industrial development. Unless sound management and conservation action is taken, future water shortages are likely to limit growth in agriculture, industry, and urban development; further jeopardizing health, nutrition, and economic development. 184 Modern technology has allowed humans to tap the vast

underground water reservoirs of the world. We pump water

from these aquifers at rates which far exceed the natural replenishment. The effects of excessive use of groundwater

can be found in china, India, united states, and the former

soviet union where the Caspian and Aral seas have been shrinking because of ground water overdraft.38 Between

1950 and 1980, the amount of water drawn from u.s. lakes,

streams, reservoirs, and underground aquifers increased by 150 percent, while the population increased by only one half.~

E.1.1. Irrigation Management Problems World wide irrigation of agricultural lands accounts

for approximately 70 percent of fresh water use. The remaining 20 percent is used for industry, and 10 percent

for domestic purposes.40 Agriculture in the United states accounts for more than 80 percent of total water use.41 Worldwide, agricultural irrigation is highly inefficient. Flood irrigation is the most common technique used, but allows most of the water to evaporate into the atmosphere or seep into the ground rather than being absorbed by plants.

Irrigation systems, on average, have an efficiency rating of only 37 percent.~ 185

In 1980, total per capita water withdrawals from surface and groundwater supplies for nine comparably industrialized nations were compiled by the Worldwatch

Institute. Daily united states withdrawals were 27,250 gallons per person, compared with 18,150 gallons for Canada,

13,625 for the soviet Union, and only 5,300 for the united

Kingdom (see Table K.2, p.186).~

In the united states, one-fifth of the water pumped out of the ground each year is nonrenewable.44 Throughout the western world, rapid development and increasing use of irrigation is causing extensive water withdrawals from rivers, streams, and aquifers. In many parts of the Great Plains and Southwestern United states, groundwater withdrawals for agricultural irrigation far exceeds natural replenishment.

The Ogallala aquifer is the largest aquifer in the world, and is a good example of current world wide irrigation management. It underlies the Great Plains of the united states, including the states of Kansas, Colorado,

Oklahoma, New Mexico, Arizona, and Texas. Water is being drawn from wells at a rate far exceeding the natural recharge. This annual overdraft is currently at a rate which is equivalent to the annual flow of the Colorado 186

River.45 For two decades farmers of this region, instead of cooperating to regulate pumping regionally and to replenish the aquifer insofar as possible, have been competing in drawing water for their own immediate profit without regard to the future of the region. Water recognizes no property boundaries; consequently, any individual who attempted to conserve water was in danger of having his water pumped out from under them by less scrupulous neighbors.~

Table K.247 Selected Countries Estimated Water withdrawals Total and Per capita, 1980-86

Total Per capita Country (billion gallons (thousand gallons per day) per day) united states 6,370 27

Canada 454 18

Former Soviet Union 3,660 13

Japan 1,158 9

Mexico 563 7

India 4,004 6

United Kingdom 295 5

Poland 174 5

China 4,769 4.5

Indonesia 435 3 187 This entire irrigation region has been and currently is engaged compulsively in the exercise of putting itself out of business. Within two or three decades water levels in the aquifer will have fallen so far as to make the cost of further pumping prohibitive. To date, the water table around Tucson, Arizona, which depends exclusively on groundwater, has fallen an average of 150 feet.~

In Australia, the consequences of agricultural irrigation mismanagement is facing the Murray-Darling river basin.49 This basin covers approximately one-seventh of the Australian continent and is considered the food basket of the country. One-quarter of the nation's cattle and dairy herds, half of its sheep and cropland, and almost three-quarters of its irrigated land is in this basin. This region is suffering increasing problems of salinity, which is the second problem associated with irrigated agriculture, ground water depletion being the first.50

Salinity problems are common with irrigated agriculture. Irrigated agriculture, coupled with the lack of natural vegetation encourages greater than natural ground water recharge. This leads to a rise in the water table, in many instances causing the water table to meet the soil surface with the consequence of waterlogging the soil. Salt 188 stored deep in the soil is flushed to the surface, encrusting the surface and creating a lifeless terrain. soil salinization is already widespread in irrigated lands worldwide.

One short-sighted and overused solution to salinity and waterlogging problems is draining irrigated farmland back into the source from which the water is taken. An example of this is the Colorado river, salinity of which has been increasing rapidly during the past two decades. As the river flows through Nevada, Arizona, and California, farmers draw water from it and discharge their drainage into it. Current salinity levels at the Imperial Dam, which blocks a part of the Colorado, is over 900 parts per million (ppm); by the year 2000, it is expected to exceed 1,200 ppm. The

Colorado flows into some of Mexico's most productive irrigated farm land, yet has been so salinated it cannot be used for irrigation. The United states government has signed an agreement with Mexico that commits this country to reducing salinity of the river. One of the largest and most expensive desalination plants in the world has been proposed as a solution. 51

Worldwide, an enormous amount of water used for irrigation is wasted. This occurs primarily because the 189 cost of water is heavily subsidized by national governments and is essentially cost free to farmers.52 In the United states, waste in water is encouraged by the u.s. Bureau of Reclamation's policy, which sells water to western farmers at low subsidized rates.53 Bureau of Reclamation irrigation projects are used to grow a wide variety of crops. One project near Pueblo, Colorado was built to irrigate land for growing corn, sorghum, and alfalfa; plants used for cattle feed. The project cost tax payers of the

United states more than $530 million dollars. According to a 1981 Government Accounting Office report, complete cost of delivering water was $54 per acre-foot; however, farmers at that time were charged only 7 cents per acre-foot.54 To date, this form of governmental agricultural subsidy remains unchanged.

E.2. Water Resource conflicts

As water shortages increase, international rivers and lakes will be the focus of growing tension. Of the 200 largest river systems worldwide, 150 are shared by two nations, and more than 50 by 3 to 10 nations. These major water ways support approximately 40 percent of the world's population. 55 International competition over these shared water bodies is creating conflicts and having an effect upon national water management policies (see Table K.3 p.191). 190

While both third world and industrialized nations share

a host of common water related problems, most industrialized nations have the advantage of a relatively abundant water supply. Because water is the foremost resource required for

industrial development, it is not surprising that

industrialized nations have similar water problems. Not

considering periodic fluctuations in precipitation, some

major problems include: 1. Supply strains caused by demands of a growing population which tend to concentrate around

developed cities and communities. 2. Current exploitation of most easily accessible

water supplies.

3. Decline of existing water related infrastructure and lack of funds to repair, replace or up-grade existing systems.

4. Overdraft of existing groundwater supplies. 5. Surface and groundwater pollution.

By far, pollution of surface and ground water supplies by industry, energy producers, agriculture, and domestic human activities is the most severe and difficult to manage of these problems. 191

Table It. 356 International Water Conflicts Escalated During 1980's

Countries Involved Rivers in Disputes Subject of Dispute

Nile Egypt, Ethiopia, Sudan Siltation, flooding, water flow diversion

Euphrates, Tigris Iraq, Syria, Turkey Reduced water flow, salinization {constraints on irrigation & hydropower}

Jordan, Yannuk, Israel, Jordan, Syria Water flow/diversion Litani, West Bank Aquifers Lebanon

Indus, Sutlei India, Pakistan Irrigation

Brahmaputra, Ganges Bangladesh, India Siltation, flooding, water flow

SalweenlNu Jiang Burma, China Siltation, flooding

Mekong Kampuchea, Laos, Water flow, flooding Thailand, Vietnam

Paran'a Argentina, Brazil Dam, land inundation

Lauca Bolivia, Chile Dam, Salinization

Rio Grande, Colorado Mexico, United States Salinization, water flow, agrochemical pollution

Great Lakes Canada, United States Water Diversion

Rhine France, Netherlands, Switzerland Industrial pollution Germany

Maas, Schelde Belgium, Netherlands Salinization, industrial pollution

Elbe Czechoslovakia, Germany Industrial pollution

Sumos Hungary, Romania Industrial pollution

E.3. Industrial Pollution

Most industrial processes produce potential water

pollutants. These include production of petroleum, petrochemicals, and other commercial chemicals; pesticides, herbicides, and fertilizers. Production of steel, other metals, as well as paper are also major sources of 192 industrial pollution. Both regulated and unregulated waste disposal facilities, urban runoff, acid precipitation, and radioactive waste near nuclear weapons facilities all represent other important sources of water pollution in the

industrial world.57 Major industrial pollutants include chlorinated organic compounds, minerals and oils, phenols, nitrogen, phosphorus, mercury, lead, and cadmium.

E.4. Water Problems Facinq the united states

For many years in the united states, only residents of

arid western states worried about water. Water quantity and quality is now a major issue in all 48 contiguous states.58 The 1982 report on the state of the environment by The

Conservation Foundation, a nonprofit environmental policy watch group, describes how excessive consumption of surface water has led to a reliance on groundwater, which has been

depleted in some regions and stressed by pollution in

others. 59 Robert Harris, a member of the Council on Environmental Quality during former President Carter's administration, told a New York Times Reporter in 1981 that drinking water is "a significant public health hazard".60 During the fall of 1982, the Environmental Protection Agency

found that groundwater supplies of 29 percent of the 954 cities in its sample were contaminated, mainly from toxic waste leeched from nearby landfills.61 193 The united states stewardship of its most vital resource has been based upon political and economic factors, rather than environmental factors. Historically, the issue in western states has been quantity of water needed to sustain farming. The issue in the East was quality. These issues are still critical. But the scale has changed due to the migration of millions to the mid-west and population growth and concentration in cities of the Atlantic and

Pacific coasts. Now western states as well as the rest of the country have water problems centered around quantity as well as quality available for drinking, irrigating, and use in industrial and energy production.

E.4.1. Pollution

Ground water pollution is one of the most serious problems facing the united states. The Environmental Protection Agency in 1985 estimates that there were 19,000 abandoned and uncontrolled hazardous waste sites in this country, all leaching, to some degree, hazardous waste into the ground water. There are more than 93,000 licensed municipal and industrial landfills in the u.s. which are supposedly non-hazardous, but due to lack of monitoring records it is impossible to be sure if they are environmentally safe. Additionally, the EPA states that there are more than 180,000 surface pits and lagoons 194 containing liquid waste, as well as 2.3 million underground petroleum tanks. It is estimated that between 3 percent and 25 percent are leaking. The EPA also estimates that there are more than 20 million septic tanks, many of which are improperly sited, others periodically cleaned with hazardous solvents.Q

A 1988 survey by the Environmental Protection Agency showed that more than 17,000 (approximately 10 percent) of the nation's rivers, streams, and bays are polluted enough to be a public health threat. The study also pointed out that this problem is partially a result of more than 250 city sewage facilities and 620 industrial operations which routinely dump toxic waste into our waterways.~

A good example of this problem is found in the water history of Chicago. For more than 150 years Chicago has been drawing its water from Lake Michigan, one of the largest bodies of fresh water in the world and repository for the city's industrial, municipal, and domestic treated and untreated wastewater. Milwaukee, Detroit, and Buffalo are similar to Chicago in that they are located near lakes and, consequently, have not had to develop outlying water resources. Also, like Chicago, they have had serious problems with pollution of their water source because of 195 municipal sewage and industrial toxic waste being discharged into their water supplies.~

Chicagoans first purchased their water from street vendors. In 1834, 10 to 25 cents was paid per barrel of fresh water. Vendors would get their barrels of water from the shores of Lake Michigan. Soon the shoreline became too polluted with sewage to collect safe water. Lake pollution problems continue to this day.

Despite locating water intake works up to four miles out into the bottom of the lake and reversing the direction of the Chicago River, municipal and industrial pollution eventually forced Chicago to initiate a wastewater treatment and subsequent filtration process. In 1964, Chicago brought on line one of the world's largest central filtration and treatment plants, required to make water from Lake Michigan safe for human consumption.65 It is interesting to note that this entire process, from selling barrels of safe lake shore drinking water for 25 cents a barrel, to having the largest central filtration and water treatment plant in the world, has occurred over a period of only 130 years.

E.4.1.1. Industrial Pollution. The largest source of industrial water pollution in the united states comes from 196 the chemical and plastic industries. Metal finishing, iron, and steel industries are next in line. Pulp wood and paper industries, metal foundries, mining operations, and petroleum refineries are other major sources.~

Chemical and oil spills into our waterways cause extensive damage which take years and millions of dollars to clean and restore, and may never be completely removed. Nationwide, more than twenty major oil spills occur each year and since 1981 there have been more than two dozen spills of a million gallons or more.67 A tragic example of the devastation and cost this type of pollution can have, occurred on the Monongahela River in December of 1988. A fuel storage tank burst, emptying a million gallons, unleashing a forty-foot wave of diesel fuel into the river.

As the drinking water for Pittsburgh became instantly unsuitable for consumption, the oil slick spread downstream, affecting drinking water for more than 800,000 consumers. Apparently during this crisis one or more industries decided to dump cancer causing industrial solvents into adjoining Ohio River with the notion of not being detected.~

E.4.1.2. Hazardous Waste. Only a fraction of the waste from all of our nation's industries is recycled, detoxified, or destroyed. Approximately two-thirds of this toxic waste 197 is disposed of through injection wells, surface pits, or landfills. All of these disposal methods pose threats to ground water.~

In the united states, more than 77,000 sites are

licensed to receive and dispose of hazardous waste from

industrial, municipal, agricultural, and mining sites. As of July 1987, the Environmental Protection Agency had placed

951 of these sites on its national priority list of sites

needing urgent attention. This is because most of these sites pose immediate or potential treats to both surface and

ground water.ro

E.4.1.3. Surface and Ground Water Pollution. Most Americans assume the layer of soil and rock above an aquifer is a natural filter that will purify any material dumped on the ground above it. For years, industrialists and farmers

based dumping any gunk they wanted on this premise.

Hydrologists know that such an assumption is wrong. Pollutants can, and do, leach into aquifers. It all depends on local circumstances. In Georgia, for example, some

aquifers are covered by 300 feet of clay, which is enough to cope with anything that might be dumped on it. Florida, in

contrast, is a five hundred mile long stretch of limestone 198 and sand. Aquifers are shallow, and anything dumped on the

ground above them tends to leach into them quickly.?1

When surface water becomes polluted, it can often be treated, or, over time, cleanse itself. The problem of cleaning an aquifer is immense. Even if every source of

ground water contamination was blocked, enormous amounts would still remain in the soil and rock above aquifers, and leach for decades into the water table. Ending ground water pollution now, even if it that were possible, would only help to prevent future pOllution.n

Once polluted, aquifers tend to stay that way. Water moves in them only slowly, at rates of 5-50 feet per year. contaminants typically form "plumes" that continue to be highly concentrated. They do not disperse into adjacent water where their effect would be diluted.~

Groundwater is the most precious and least protected resource in the united states. It is the only source of drinking water for approximately half the population. Any pollutant that comes in contact with the ground has potential to contaminate water beneath. It is estimated that one quarter of usable groundwater is already 199 dangerously contaminated and that three quarters of the ground water in some regions of the country are contaminated (see Figure K.5, p.200).~

To find a cure for what is already in the ground will be a difficult and costly endeavor. Technology is being developed that may one day allow aquifers to be cleaned.

Both biological and chemical treatments of contaminated aquifers is being explored. Micro-organisms, for example, could be injected into an aquifer to consume a contaminant. The technology for this is currently in the research and development stage, and its potential is highly questionable.~ Another alternative for decontaminating an aquifer would be to pump contaminants out. That too is dangerous, for besides disruption to the aquifer, something has to be done with the polluted water.

A survey of more than 8,000 industrial waste disposal sites revealed that over 70 percent of the sites are unlined, and at least 30 percent are located in permeable materials that lie above usable aquifers. One-third of these sites are located within a mile of a water supply well. Recent years have seen closing of both municipal and private wells because of ground water contamination.u 200

~ ~ ",~~.I' Sources of groundwater contamination ~ _~

--.. A'2>..~ rJ"< ~eClpl\allOn . E vaPOlransporal;on ~~""_~~/,.",.. "~ __;;:r:;----~,~~---P- . InJection Weir' i If' I ;"~I~ ' ~'\;\ ~~\\,'

" or Disposal I ' PumpIng Well' \\ ,\ Land $preadmg I SePtic Tan~1 I landfill. Dump or Refuse Pile or .Irr'gat,on Cesspool Sewer --~- ~-~ PorcolOllon Dlschargo Lea~a9c PorCOlallon ~ . • Water Table AQuifer

Confining Zone ..,- ~ Aneslan AQuifer (Fresh) leakage ____ Ground Waler --- Movemcnt ConfinIng Zonc -+o--'nlCnllOnal Input .•••••• Un,nlcnt.onai Anes,an AQuller (Saline) Input

Figure K.Sn Sources of Groundwater contamination

Currently there is no systematic monitoring of the nation's ground water. However, there is strong incidental evidence of pollution's extent and magnitude, brought to light by some recent discoveries. In the spring of 1980, the Council on Environmental Quality compiled all reports of groundwater contamination that had been filled at EPA's regional offices. Results showed that contamination had occurred in at least 34 states: in nearly every state east of the Mississippi River.n 201 E.4.1.4. Aqricultural Sources of Pollution. Agriculture in this country is a major source of organic and inorganic pollutants, caused primarily by modern farming practices which rely heavily on nitrogen fertilizers, pesticides and herbicides. Runoff from large amounts of animal waste is also a threat. Pesticides and fertilizers have contaminated ground water in many parts of the U.S., believed to affect more than 50 million people. Contamination from these agricultural sources contributes to nitrates in drinking water which, in large concentrations, can kill or disable human infants and animal livestock.~

Nitrates have a much larger effect on marine life estuaries and tidal pools. Sixty pesticides, many of which are known carcinogens, have been found in various amounts in ground water of 30 states.~

E.4.1.5. The Need for Conservation. As already stated, water problems are no longer just a western dilemma. In addition to quantity and quality problems created by increasing population and its resulting pollution, the 1980's saw a series of droughts which had an effect upon the East Coast of the united States as well as the West. This series of natural weather conditions coupled with concern of global climate change has alarmed city officials from coast to coast. 202 The predominant water related question facing the u.s. centers around relative adequacy or inadequacy of the nation's current water control system, and what changes need to be made to facilitate correction and enhancement of our water supply.81 During the mid-1980's, New York City Mayor

Edward I. Koch appointed an intergovernmental task force to come up with recommendations for future city water needs in light of mounting problems, including global climatic change. The task force recommendations were based on a new management format, centered around water demand management based on hydrological rather than political boundaries. This concept is taking hold across the country.~

During the 1960's, a series of droughts spurred Congress to authorize the Army Corps of Engineers to study the nation's water supply. This study pinpointed the metropolitan areas of Washington, D.C., New York City, and eastern Massachusetts - Rhode Island as critical problem areas. The Corps predicted regional population of 50 million would grow to 80 million by the year 2020, making these areas extremely vulnerable to recurring droughts. Droughts of the past had caused inconvenience and economic losses. Now urban centers of the east perceive themselves to be vulnerable to a water system breakdown.M 203

This would involve more than just inconvenience, with acceptable levels of monetary losses. Potential loss of life through fire, disease, deprivation, and economic loss on a disastrous scale become more realistic possibilities.

New York City considers its water problems to be of critical importance. By the year 2020, there is predicted a rise in daily water demand from a range of 250 million to 1 billion gallons. This could be an increase in demand of up to 71 percent more water per day. To deal with this predicted rise, New York City, as well as other East Coast cities, are investigating the possibility of metering all water users. Currently in New York City, residential water service is billed based on building frontage and number of water-using fixtures. Additionally, leak detection is being stepped up as is enforcement of New York state's low flow fixture law.~

Traditionally, water problems in the united states have been solved by presenting an issue to Congress and waiting for them to cut the check. However, the current state of the u.s. economy, which is operating at a near trillion dollar annual deficit, will no longer be the sole source of funding for major water projects. In 1986, Congress enacted significant cost-sharing requirements for all new water 204

projects they are asked to authorize.85 The result is that the Army Corps of Engineers and Interior Department's Bureau of Reclamation will no longer control water projects. state and local governments will have to pay a larger share of the

cost for water projects which develop new water sources,

clean polluted aquifers, or build new waste water treatment plants.M Consequently, direct cost of providing water

services is going to increase for the local end user, mainly

in order to pay for solutions to current water problems.

Another problem is the potential ecological impact of the greenhouse effect. This is the future effect of the planet's gradually rising sea level caused by increasing amounts of carbon dioxide, methane, chlorofluorocarbons, and other gases in the atmosphere that are warming the planet, and causing polar ice cap melting.87

A 1986 study ordered by the u.s. Environmental Protection Agency and the Delaware River Basin Commission revealed that a 21-inch rise in global sea level by the year 2050 would imply a rise of 2.4 feet in the Delaware

River/Bay estuary. During a drought the salt water front for the Delaware River would be pushed approximately five miles beyond Philadelphia's current water intake from the

Delaware River. The study indicated that this type of 205

potential greenhouse-effect problem could be offset with construction of additional fresh water reservoirs.~

Because of water quantity and quality problems, extremely difficult management choices will soon be facing water suppliers and regulators in all parts of the United

states. How water resources are regulated, allocated, accounted for, and conserved will have a dramatic impact on how botanic gardens and arboreta conduct business. 206 Endnotes: Appendix K

1. D. Hillel, Out of the Earth: civilization and the Life of the Soil, (New York: The Free Press, 1990), pp.31-35.

2. Christensen, Morton & Heady, Changing Energy Prices and Irrigation Patterns in u.S. Agriculture, 2 Sw.Rev. 85, 1982, pp.96-99.

3. Ibid. 4. P.H. Woodruff, "Water, Water Everywhere and Nary a Drop to Drink," The Evergreen Journal, Summer, 1991, P.12.

5. S. Lovell, Program Manager I, Water Supply Branch, Ground Water Management Section, Division of Water Resources, Delaware Department of Natural Resources, (April 30, 1991), personal interview.

6. J .P. Goubert, The Conquest of Water, (New Jersey: Princeton University Press, 1986), p.8S.

7. E.L. Armstrong, (ed.), History of Public Works in the United States: 1776-1976, (Chicago, American Pubic Works Association, 1976), pp.217.

8. Ibid. 9. Ibid.

10. Meyers, Tarlock, Corbridge, and Getches, Water Resource Management, A Casebook in Law and Public Policy, Third Edition, (New York, The Foundation Press, Inc.,1988), p.20. 11. Archives of the city of Brussels, 2 November 1860, Report of the medical committee on the analysis requested by the City of Brussels on 26 October 1860, quoted in Liliane Vire', La Distribution publique d'eau a' Bruxelles 1830-1870 (Brussels, 1973), p.36.

12. J.P. Goubert, The Conquest of Water, (New Jersey: Princeton University Press, 1986), p.8S.

13. Ibid, p.42.

14. E.L. Armstrong, (ed.), History of Public Works in the United States: 1776-1976, (Chicago, American Public Works Association, 1976). pp.219-227. 207 15. M. Reisner, Cadillac Desert: The American West and its Disappearing Water, (New York: Viking, 1986), pp.6-11. 16. Ibid. 17. Meyers, Tar lock, Corbr idge, and Getches, Water Resource Management, A Casebook in Law and Public Policy, Third Edition, (New York, The Foundation Press, Inc.,1988) pp.43- 44. 18. Anonymous Author, Private Water System Handbook, (Ames Iowa, Midwest Plan Service, 1979). p.8.

19. Ibid. 20. Ibid, p.6.

21. R.A. Aldrich, and J.W. Bartok, Greenhouse Engineering, (Ithaca, New York, Cornell University Press, 1984), p.46. 22. Anonymous Author, Private Water systems Handbook, (Ames, Iowa, Midwest Plan Service, 1979), p.6. 23. Anonymous Author, Private Water Systems Handbook, (Ames, Iowa, Midwest Plan Service, 1979), p.38.

24. Ibid. p.109. 25. D.S. Ross, R.A. Parsons, H.E. Carpenter, Trickle Irrigation in the Eastern united States, (Northeast Regional Agricultural Engineering Service, 1985), p.5. 26. T. Horton, Bay Country: Reflections on the Chesapeake, (New York: Ticknor & Fields, 1987), pp.86-92.

27. Ibid.

28. Ibid. 29. Ibid.

30. E.L. Armstrong, Ced.), History of Public Works in the united States: 1776-1976, (Chicago: American Pubic Works Association, 1976), pp.399-408. 31. T. Horton, Bay Country: Reflections on the Chesapeake (New York: Ticknor & Fields, 1987), pp.86-92. 32. Ibid. 210

63. International River Network, World Rivers Review, July- August 1989, p.4.

64. E.L. Armstrong, (ed.), History of Public Works in the united states, 1776-1976 (Chicago: American Public Works Association, 1976), pp.226-228.

65. Ibid.

66. Anonymous Author, state of the Environment 1982, (Washington, DC: The Conservation Foundation, 1982), p.126.

67. S. Postel, Defusing the Toxic Threat: Controlling Pesticides and Industrial Waste, Worldwatch Paper 79, (Washington, D.C.: Worldwatch Institute, September 1987), p.22.

68. Anonymous Author, The Washington Post, February 2, 1988, P.A3.

69. Ibid.

70. Ibid.

71. S. Hillgren, "Water in America," The Economist, October, 1986, p.35.

72. Ibid.

73. Ibid.

74. E. Draper, "Groundwater Protection," Clean Water Action News, Fall 1987, p.3.

75. Ibid.

76. Anonymous Author, The state of the Environment 1982, (Washington, DC: The Conservation Foundation, 1982), p.110.

77. u.s. Environmental Protection Agency, as published in Concern, Inc. , Drinking Water: A Community Action Guide (Washington, DC, 1986), p.2.

78. P. Rogers, "The Future of Water," The Atlantic Monthly, July 1983, Vol. 252, p.85.

79. G.R. Hallberg, "From Hoes to Herbicides: Agriculture and Groundwater Quality," Journal of Soil and Water Conservation, November-December 1986, pp.358-359. 211 80. M.H. Fleming, "Agricultural Chemicals in Ground Water: Preventing contamination by Removing Barriers against Low- Input Farm Management," American Journal of A1ternative Agriculture, Vol. 2, No.3, Summer 1987.

81. L. Mosher, "Where I s the Water," National Journal, January, 1988, Vol. 20, NO.5, p.256.

82. Ibid, p.257.

83. Ibid. 84. Ibid.

85. Ibid.

86. R.L. Stanfield, "Enough and Clean Enough?," National Journal, August 1985, Vol.17, No. 33-34, p.1876. 87. J. Leggett (ed), Global Warming: The Greenpeace Report, (New York, Oxford University Press, 1990), pp.14-43.

88. L. Mosher, "Where I s the Water?," National Journal, January 1988, Vol. 20, No.5, P.271.