The proposed regulations are meant to monitor the amount of water being removed from the area, as well as ensuring the least amount of environmental changes. In order to be considered for water extraction, companies must outline every single part of what they expect to do. They have to provide a reason for the water extraction, as well as analyses of recharge rates, and resulting (added) vehicular traffic. For the environmental side, they need to list potential effects of the operation (good or bad). They also show a map of any plots of land being used, and what they are going to be used for. All of this information is given to a “Planning Board” which has the ability to grant or deny the applicant permission to water extraction. Each approval only stands for three years. After the three years are up, the applicant goes through the entire process again. The final major aspect of this proposed regulation is that the Board may rescind their approval if something goes wrong (the extraction limits are exceeded).
Another approach to this problem could be economic incentives. Monetary restrictions and offers are very useful tools when dealing with anyone, from big corporations to smaller individuals. One possibility could be charging per gallon. The town has chosen large scale extraction to be “extraction of water from ground water sources, aquifers, springs, wells, and similar sources in a total amount on any given day of 20,000 gallons or more (Kanak, 2009).” After this 20,000 gallon mark is reached, the price per gallon can be raised significantly to reduce the chances of exceeding this level. A second possibility could be to sell permits for the use of Wells water. The town can sell a certain number of permits for water extraction and distribute them amongst the approved applicants. This would ensure that their ideal extraction amount is never exceeded. If the company that has the permit doesn’t extract all of the water allowed under the permit there are three options. The town could (a) let the company sell the remaining amount to another company, (b) let the company sell the remaining amount back to the town, or (c) allow the remaining amount to carry over to the next day.
I think that the permit idea would work the best out of the options listed above. Selling permits would make sure that no matter how many people or companies want to extract water, the ‘acceptable’ amount would not be passed. It would still be necessary to get proposals from the parties interested in extraction. This would be to prevent any possible environmental change or damage. If permits are in place, it is then up to the ‘extractors’ to allot amounts among themselves, as opposed to a proposal board deciding who can extract how much after each application.
References:
Kanak, Jim. "Wells Voters to decideon Water Extraction Regulation." The Weekly Sentinel. 30 Oct. 2009. Web. 14 Nov. 2009.
I agree that permits sound la good plan of action in this situation as it makes it really easy to control water levels. The regulatory control also seems like a good idea as the requirements are very stringent and allow utmost control over the water while with the economic incentive, people are not discouraged from using water until they exceed a maximum level. I think that controlling resources at all levels of use is a very important aspect of resource management and it sounds like the regulatory control that has been proposed accomplishes this.
ReplyDelete-Elisabeth Shapiro