Imagine turning your television on to the following Public Service Announcement. A woman is sitting at a small table in her kitchen drinking a tall glass of water with no ice. The camera draws in on her face as she says, “If each and every one of us conserved enough water to cut our use in half, we could double the number of people moving into our county. That’s why every night before I go to bed, I turn on every spigot in the house and leave them running all night long!”

Before you think that I have totally gone off of the deep end, let me say unequivocally that I am not advocating wasting water as a means to limit growth — it would never work. Conservation is an ethical responsibility that we all must follow in order to preserve one of our area’s most vital and limited natural resources, water. The ambiguity lies not in if we should conserve water, but why.

Public perception may or may not be based on reality. Regardless of its basis, the public’s perception of an issue can not be underestimated. Many citizens of Southwest Florida believe that conserving water is not meaningful because the water they conserve is not actually saved. Instead it becomes available for use by someone else. And that someone else doesn’t even live here yet. Unfortunately this perception is not far from reality.

The future water supply plans for both Sarasota County and the Water Management District list every gallon of water conserved as an available future water supply source. The thinking from the water planners’ perspective is that every gallon saved is one gallon less that will have to be taken from the region’s vulnerable ground or surface water resources. Nevertheless, conserved water does end up on the “available-for-consumption” side of the water equation. For many citizens, this is not a compelling motive to conserve, perceived or otherwise.

But what if we actually did conserve the conserved water? From the 1920’s to the mid 1970’s many, if not most of Sarasota County’s natural wetlands were ditched and drained. Even today many of the natural benefits of these altered wetlands are still severely impaired. And due to over-pumping, our aquifers are losing pressure and becoming polluted with salt water from the gulf. If the water saved through our conservation initiatives were required to be dedicated to restoring impacted wetlands, aquifers and natural systems to a healthier state, water conservation would soar, and for good reason.

This new conservation philosophy should also include a policy to ensure that natural systems will not be deprived of the water that they need. As we evaluate new water sources for new development, the needs of the natural systems should be determined and set aside or restored and not available for taking. Rather than evaluating how much water we can get by leaving wetlands with minimal water flows and levels, the new ethic would require that natural systems maintain optimum flows and levels.

Unfortunately, the concept of setting aside and preserving the natural system’s water budget first has yet to be adopted by many water planning agencies. This paradigm shift toward restoring and preserving natural systems is likely to produce just as much water as convention strategies, but at a fraction of the all-inclusive price to be paid. The water is there, we are just need to begin taking it in a more sustainable fashion.

With the conserved water now being dedicated to wetlands restoration, aquifer recharge, open space preservation and healthier estuaries, even the most cynical citizens among us would have a reason to conserve water that is both self-serving and altruistic.

New commercial; same lady, same table, same glass of water, only this time as the camera zooms in she says “Every night when I go to bed, I know that my water conservation efforts are going to help preserve the natural beauty that makes Sarasota a such a special place to live!”

Having a diversity of water supply sources is more sustainable and can reduce impacts to the environment much more than a single supply source can. Using several source types — such as ground water, reuse water and surface water — allows individual sources to be used when they are abundant and replenished when they are not.

During the summer rainy season, surface water, also known as stormwater, can be used while ground water sources from wells are given a chance to recharge. During drier times of the year, ground and reuse water can be used, giving surface water sources a chance to rehydrate wetlands and water tables. Using multiple water sources greatly reduces the strain on the natural environment by minimizing the competition for limited water resources — Wetlands stay healthier, aquifers are allowed to recharge, and we get the water we need.

Larger interconnected regional systems offer additional benefits by not only having the advantages of diversified water sources, but more of them distributed over a larger, less vulnerable area. Ideally a diversified, interconnected regional water supply system offers the most drought-proof and environmentally sustainable water supply system available.

Sarasota County’s newest water supply initiative captures excess surface water from Cow Pen Slough while also restoring wetlands and bay water quality. Combined with existing County water supply resources, the new Cow Pen Slough water may be adequate to meet the County’s needs for the next 35 years, or more.

But there is a catch. The cost to bring Cow Pen Slough water to your tap exceeds $180 million dollars. The Water Management District has grants available to fund just this sort of water supply initiative, but the District may want Sarasota County to surrender ownership of the water source in order to obtain the grant money. The grant money isn’t really a gift, as Sarasota County taxpayers are one of the larger contributors to the source that funds the grant.

One concept presently being considered to create a regional water supply system is to put all of the region’s combined water supply sources into a pool and have a portion of the rate the same for all customers in the pool. This concept may not be favorable to Sarasota County utility customers. Not all jurisdictions in the water supply pool have been able to identify a long-term, environmentally sustainable water supply source and a funding plan to pay for it. They also may not share Sarasota County’s philosophies on growth. Some regional partners may consider Sarasota’s growth management policies too conservative and opt for more aggressive growth policies that would need additional new water supply sources to accommodate their new growth. And that is certainly their decision.

In terms of new water supplies, the low hanging fruit is gone. Future water supplies will become increasing more expensive as the demand for water competes with limited supplies and the environment. As the region’s thirst for more regional water supplies grows, so too will the price. In a regional rate pool, Sarasota County utility customers may see higher rates caused by non-Sarasota County water consumption. To some degree, we could actually find ourselves subsidizing growth in other jurisdictions.

Decades before regionalization was in vogue, Sarasota County worked with Manatee County in a regional water supply partnership. Sarasota County purchased Manatee County’s excess water supply while Manatee County retained ownership of the supply source. Sarasota County is now in a position to offer the same regional partnership to its neighbors who will need water considerably sooner than Sarasota County will. Sarasota would develop the new Cow Pen Slough water supply, with the help of the Water Management District grant, and offer the excess water supply to our regional partners, while retaining ownership of the supply source. A written agreement between the County and a regional water supply authority would validate this partnership and offer Sarasota County an opportunity to stabilize rates for its utility customers.

A diverse, interconnected regional water supply system is clearly in the best interest of all governments and citizens of Southwest Florida. The recent emphasis on regionalization, by limiting new water supply grants to regional water supply initiatives is commendable. However “regional” should be defined in terms of connectivity, environmental stewardship and sustainability, not ownership.

How can the Sarasota County Commission mandate water conservation for existing residents and then approve rezonings that allow for even more development?

To understand this dilemma, it is helpful to understand the relationship between rezonings, growth management and water supply planning. Sarasota County has both a short-term and a long-term water supply planning strategy. Short-term planning considers having adequate water to serve existing utility customers (about 187,000), new customers from homes converting from private wells to County water (about 300 per year), new homes built on platted lots and approved Developments of Regional Impact (about 2,000 per year) and rezoned property (200 per year).

Short-term needs are also two-dimensional; first water consumption varies considerably depending on the resident population and weather conditions. In the winter months when our population swells and rainfall is minimum, demand increases. However year round water supply must account for the peak demand. When a three-year drought stresses this water budget, conservation is a necessity, even if there was a moratorium on new growth and rezonings.

The County has adequate capacity to meet its short-term water needs with about seven years worth of reserve capacity. But this is no excuse to waste water and force additional, costly production that will be wasted when the rain begins and snowbirds return north. Rezoning does not commit the County to, or guarantee a developer water. If the County utility system does not have water when a rezoned property needs it, they don’t get it, period. Conservation enables the County to meet water need in times of peak demand and low rainfall. Conservation savings do not enable rezonings.

More safeguards needed

The County Commission recognizes that additional safeguards are needed to protect our water supply. On June 12 the Board will consider a new water commitment process that will bolster the analysis done at the time of rezoning with a second level of review. This process could require a developer to obtain a water commitment certificate prior to the issuance of a building permit. The advantage will be that water supply would not only be based on what is permitted (the long term view) but also upon what we are capable of delivering based upon the actual ability to treat and deliver water (the short term look).

Long range water planning is where Sarasota needs to be paying close attention. Considering present water supply sources Sarasota has enough water to meet its demands until about 2011, when contracts with Manatee County expire. The Water Management District has identified numerous potential future sources to meet the approximate 15 million gallons per day deficit. These sources include renegotiating with Manatee County, new surface waters (Myakka River) and seawater desalination. However not all of these sources are reliable due to costs, permitability or public policy. Linking Sarasota’s long-range growth management plan with realistic water sources is critical, and the time to do it is now!

Plan for the next drought

Droughts are cyclical. We will see another and it could be even more severe than the present one. Water resources are taking longer and longer to restore themselves, due to an ever growing population constantly using more and more water. So even less severe droughts in the future could have more devastating results, due to lower water tables, depleted aquifers, and drier lakes and rivers.

Without a coordinated planning effort that considers realistic, affordable and environmentally sensitive long-range water supplies, our next drought could make this one look like a walk in the park — a very dry park.

News stories are reporting about Sarasota County’s “abnormal drought” or “below normal rainfall” conditions this year. These descriptions are catchy, but they’re also unintentionally confusing and may lead policy makers and planners to make critical miscalculations. The reports of abnormal weather conditions may present accurate data, “year-to-date rainfall is below an annual average,” but they lead the public into thinking that lower-than-average annual rainfall is an unexpected and atypical weather pattern.

Normal is something that conforms to a regular pattern or occurs naturally. Like most geological phenomena, weather is best understood when considered in terms of decades or centuries. While this year’s drought may appear “abnormal” when compared to last year, or even the last five or six years, it is perfectly normal in terms of the last 20, 50 or 100 years. In fact, the news accounts that described the droughts of 2000, 1980, 1971 and 1956, read just like today’s news.

Periodic severe droughts are not only normal; they are cyclical and relatively predictable. We will likely see another one, or maybe two, some time within the next ten years. What’s becoming abnormal is the environment’s ability to cope with these naturally occurring drought cycles. As the human consumption of water increases, more and more water is taken from our aquifers, lakes, rivers and streams. The ability for these natural systems to recuperate from prolonged droughts is diminished year after year. Even if we disregard the possibility of human-aggravated climate change, decades of over-pumping have clearly compromised the environment’s ability to recover from even naturally occurring droughts.

Water supply planners attempt to calculate water needs for human consumption and the environment by estimating the needs of both during a “1-in-10 year drought”. They estimate how much water is needed hypothetically to sustain a healthy environment and meet the demands of utility customers during a drought that occurs, on average, once every ten years. This assumption has recently raised serious questions that need to be addressed before water supply planning efforts and future growth decisions are made.

The best way to maintain an adequate water supply through a Southwest Florida drought is to store enough water during the rainy season to last through the dry season. Prolonged droughts present the greatest challenge to water storage strategies. This year’s drought proved too challenging, and our storage systems, designed to the 1-in10 year standard, failed to provide adequate reserves.

It’s convenient but unwise to think that 1-in-10 year droughts occur at ten year intervals. Weather happens in cycles. It’s reasonable to assume that we will get two 1-in-10 year droughts within a two to three year period. In fact multi-year or consecutive-year droughts are the typical pattern. Should the drought we had this year continue, or another prolonged drought occur before our reserve storage systems are restored, we’ll have a very serious problem.

Water from the Peace River, a critical regional water resource, is diverted during the rainy season and stored in a 500 million gallon lake and underground aquifers capable of storing an additional six billion gallons of water. Both of these reservoir systems were depleted this year, and the region found itself struggling to find emergency water sources to meet its demands. This struggle included relaxing permit conditions intended to protect the environment and pumping more water out of the storage aquifers than was pumped into them. It took four years to accumulate this stored capacity and only one drought to wipe it out. It’ll now take another three to five years to restore reserves to a “drought resistant” capacity.

Plans are underway to increase the storage capacity of the region’s water supply. A greatly expanded surface reservoir and additional aquifers will provide much needed relief. But we must learn from past mistakes and not allow the demands of growth to outstrip our ability to ensure an environmentally sustainable, drought-proof water supply for the future. A plan designed to meet the needs of a 1-in-10 year drought, may seem “normal”, but it has also been shown to be inadequate. We need to do better. We need a more realistic approach to drought-proofing our water supply system. And we need to recognize the limits of our natural environment’s ability to endure the pressures of growth and the demand for water that they create.