Do you remember the science fiction show where a man wakes up each day and relives the same events? The same scenario is being played out now, as municipal water authorities across the country wake up one day to find they have a water shortage, and have to create a conservation program pronto. The approach taken by many cities is eerily similar: Hire several, shiny recent college grads with public relations skills, but no background in water conservation. Send them out to mollify homeowners and garden clubs, tweak sprinkler controllers (sometimes disastrously), hand out brochures with happy cartoon characters, and encourage homeowners to remain calm, that all is good. The water authority is doing its part. Four months later it rains, and the program is dropped or scaled back. Mild threats of fines are made, but
enforcement is such an ugly word. The water authority has dodged a bullet.
Or has it? Before that drought hit, how close to the edge was the water supply? Several large southwestern cities claimed to be set for life in 2002, but six months later went into panic mode. Within a few months the water supply was suddenly at dangerously low levels. In most of these cases, the real problem was a storage capacity designed for a 1970s population level, ignoring the fact the area has doubled in population since then. The cities were thrilled to collect revenue from all those new houses, shopping centers, and schools, but seldom with a thought to increased storage and supply. To avoid embarrassment, I won’t name these cities. They’re pretty easy to find on Google Earth Southwest US. Look for the big ones with lots of new subdivisions and golf courses.
As I write, the Los Angeles and San Diego, CA, areas are coming into a very dry season. The metro water district is pushing local water authorities to become proactive quickly. Is that the Twilight Zone theme song I hear?
Across the country, brochures are being printed, and recent college grads are being hired to perform goodwill “audits” [10% audit, 90% PR]. Curiously, some cities offer only indoor audits, while others offer only outdoor. Both miss half the problem. Buffets are being scheduled to discuss conservation over lobster tacos. Guest speakers thrill the water staff with visions of a future water conservation utopia, arriving at the same time as our flying cars. Meanwhile sloppy sprinklers are running metric tons of water down the gutters and the natural water supply sources are over-allocated. Can they get the word out quickly enough to dodge the water bullet? Right now it doesn’t look good, unless you are the guest speaker.
Many cities find the funds are not there to devote to a conservation program without cutting into some other budget, such as the meetings and buffets budget. Comfort zones must be protected at all costs.
Bureaucracy rears its ugly head, as proposals for conservation measures sit on “Bob’s” desk for several months, with the ensuing standard office memo:
“We should revisit this in September. Let’s fly it by Frank, scoot it by Scott, schlep it by Sean,” etc., ad nauseum. Axiom: “Buffets are much more fun than water conservation programs.” Corollary: Administration meetings and buffets are the death of progress. (If I have just described your life, rest assured I shall not point you out or give your name to the press, Dilbert.)
Since the drought in 2002, several water authorities in the Colorado Front Range have realized they must increase storage capacity now, just to meet current population increases, as well as future growth. New reservoirs are in process or on the drawing boards. Money for reservoirs means selling more water, not less, and so conservation suffers. The message comes across as “Use more water now so we can save water later, but please be conservative about it.” Additionally, riparian environments will suffer greatly as rivers are captured. Environmental groups point out that if the authorities consistently pushed major water conservation at all levels, less new capacity would be needed. True, but we would need to stop all population increase as well. Eventually nature will do that for us. The question becomes, How much will we over-allocate water supplies before that happens?
Cheer up, here comes the positive part, the part you can take to Bob down the hall.
Did you catch the secret key word to successful conservation programs? That’s right, it’s consistency, which in this case means not dropping conservation programs after four months. A shining example of consistency and positive results is Albuquerque, NM. Here are the elements of its program, headed by Katherine Yuhas, who states, “An effective water conservation program has to aggressively target three areas: education, incentives, and enforcement—and the first and most important element all the way through has to be the education.”
This is a consistent message that water conservation is important now and always will be—if people want to go on living here.
An aggressive xeriscape program has resulted in glorious xeriscaped properties across the region. As in Las Vegas, NV, the program includes rebates for efficient irrigation practices and turf removal. Rebates are for items that really make a difference—high-efficiency toilets, high-efficiency type sprinkler heads, and drip, smart controllers and rain-catchment devices.
Many cities balk at the use of an effective water-cop program with fines, but here’s the trick: The water cops shoot video of the water running down the street, the video is submitted as evidence, and warnings and fines are sent out. Property owners seldom want to argue with the video. Court time or lawyers are seldom needed. Funds collected from fines are used for rebate programs. The program is simple and effective.
Use an independent—not water company staff—water auditing or consulting firm for real water audits and outreach programs. They are paid for actual results, not grand water utopia ideas or PR brochures. This is the “no buffets” approach. Tens of thousands of properties have received real indoor/outdoor audits and customized water budgets. This program has been well honed and can be applied to any other city, saving reinventing the software/implementation wheel over and over. Using this approach versus the city staff buffet approach has saved Albuquerque significant staffing money and yielded sterling water savings.
Real customized water budgets—this approach leaves all properties feeling they have been given a fair allotment based on their property size, not a one-size allotment fits all. The response has been very positive, whereas the one-size-fits-all program creates lawsuits and legal costs.
Albuquerque still has to find and buy new water, but its conservation program has created a viable future water supply. Many cities cannot make that claim.
Albuquerque’s success boils down to the basic decision every water authority must make: What is the most pressing need—conserving water to maintain your lifestyle and existence, or saving money? Albuquerque realized early on that consistency and spending a little proactively yields effective long-term results. Look at your local conservation program—is your vision of the future the next four months, or four decades? Which is more important for your area—an adequate future water supply, or building out quickly for property tax revenue? Water is a finite resource, and no amount of meetings with speakers can convince it to increase, although many cities seem to hope that might work.
The experts say the next wars will be over water. Some in Africa already are. Some of you reading this have just cancelled your water conservation program budgets, because your mayor recently cut the ribbon declaring your water shortage officially over. It’s not over. Just like that science fiction show, you will wake up one day soon to find your area right back in a water shortage déjà vu. The way out of the trap is to follow Albuquerque’s example—be proactive, consistent, simple, and effective. And attend fewer lobster taco buffets.