Tribe fights to protect its federally-reserved water rights, attends hearings in San Francisco

by Erin Ford, originally posted on January 3, 2017

GRAND CANYON, Ariz. — In 2011, the United Nations Human Rights Council passed a resolution mandating safe water a fundamental human right. In the United States, the world’s richest country, less than one percent of non-indigenous households lack access to clean, safe water (0.6 percent), according to the report made by the UN’s independent expert.

That number skyrockets to 13 percent among Native American households.

It is in part this disparity that compelled the Havasupai Tribe to file two lawsuits in federal court aimed at protecting their water supply from the contamination resulting from uranium mining near the Grand Canyon.

The small tribe has made its home at the bottom of the Grand Canyon for around 800 years, and its livelihood depends on the seeps and springs that keep Havasu Creek flowing. Not only does the creek provide a water source for the tribe, it also creates the striking turquoise waterfalls that Havasu Canyon is known for. Tourism and camping at the site sustains the tribe’s economy.

“We are the Havsuw ‘Baaja, which means people of the blue-green water,” said Don Watahomigie, chairman of the Havasupai Tribe. “Our very being and continuance as Havasupai depends on the continued flow of our water and our ability to continue that reliance forever.”

Although the Havasupai generally do not disclose their religious beliefs and practices to those outside the tribe, tribal elders provided an explanation to underscore the importance of the area around Red Butte and the tribe’s right to continue to exercise its traditional religious beliefs and way of life.

According to the Havasupai people, the meadow where one of the mines in question is located, is known as Mit taav Tiivjuudva; it is a sacred place used by the tribe for pilgrimages, ceremonies, gathering of medicinal plants and prayer. Red Butte, towering above the forest, is known as Wiigdwiisa, home of the Grandmother, the First Woman; this is where her many children come to seek wisdom and renewal. In one of the initial court filings, Rex Tilousi, a religious and cultural leader of the tribe, explained the significance of the deeply-sacred area.

“The meadow is where the Grandmother and her Grandson meet every year to renew life for all Havasupai … we hold our babies up to face Mit taav Tiivjuudva and meet the Grandmother,” he said.

by Kelle Louaillier, originally posted on January 3, 2017

Since Donald Trump unveiled his infrastructure plan, many have written that it should be called a privatization plan, and rightly so.

The New York Times’ Paul Krugman termed it a “privatization scam” and former Obama assistant Ronald A. Klain called it a “massive corporate welfare plan.”

What has received less attention, however, is the devastating impact Trump’s plan could have on our nation’s water systems. As members of Congress concerned with the infrastructure crisis prepare to work with (and stand up to) Trump, there are a set of facts they should know when it comes to our water.

First, Trump’s plan could deepen the private industry’s reach, prioritizing corporate profit over people’s access to water. The plan essentially amounts to a $136 billion corporate tax credit that stands to make corporations richer without addressing much-needed infrastructure improvement.

While Trump’s plan does not explicitly name the private water industry, the industry knows an opportunity to fill its coffers when it sees it. Since the election, a leading private water trade group has voiced its support of Trump, noting that it is “eager to work with [his] administration to open the door” to the industry’s own pro-privatization policy agenda.

That agenda includes unfettered access to tax-exempt, private activity bonds and other public financing resources, like state revolving funds, that have historically supported public works projects.

By inviting the private sector further into the management of our infrastructure, Trump risks spreading the water industry’s disastrous track record across the country.

From Flint, Mich. to Pittsburgh, private water corporations have made water systems worse and profited at the public’s expense. For instance, the industry giant Veolia failed to warn of possible lead contamination in Flint, despite documenting inadequate corrosion control measures.

That dangerous oversight led Michigan Attorney General Bill Schuette to sue Veolia for negligence. As part of his investigation, Schuette accused Veolia of “callously and fraudulently” dismissing medical concerns through its claims that “some people may be sensitive to any water.”

The Pittsburgh Water and Sewer Authority has similarly brought Veolia into arbitration for gross mismanagement of its water system. In Hoboken, N.J., more than a dozen water mains have broken under private operation since November 2015.

Suez, the corporation charged with maintaining the system, invests only $350,000 per year into the system while extracting millions in revenue — $8 million in 2011 alone. The corporation claims the main breaks will continue until the city (and its taxpayers) invest more of their own funds to update the city’s infrastructure.

In fact, because of the industry’s mismanagement, dozens of U.S. municipalities have taken back public control of water systems they had formerly privatized.

In addition, Trump’s plan and the water industry’s policy wish list both risk delaying water infrastructure repair and expansion where it is most needed. Both prioritize profit over people’s access to water, neglecting those projects not likely to provide economic returns.

These neglected projects undoubtedly include Flint’s urgent pipe replacement needs, estimated to cost as much as $1.5 billion. But, Flint is not alone.

USA Today identified almost 2,000 additional water systems in all 50 states where testing has shown excessive levels of lead contamination. Although Trump and the industry cite the Flint crisis and aging infrastructure as a rationale for their policies, both raise the specter of more Flints in the years to come.

Finally, Trump’s plan ignores the solutions that work — public investment and public control of our water systems. Since Philadelphia established the first public water system in 1801, the U.S. has achieved access for 99 percent of its population.

Those systems, when properly funded and democratically run, provide people across the country with clean, safe drinking water. Given our current political climate, it is clear that it will take civic participation, political will and local governance to put the needs of people over corporate bottom lines and protect water as a common good.

Decisionmakers should advocate for public funding for our water systems, not private control. Communities across the country must continue to organize, keeping their water systems in public hands.

As we look ahead to 2017, we are prepared to support communities to strengthen their municipal water systems with public funding, not corporate tax breaks. Lawmakers must stand with these communities and reject Trump’s efforts to enrich water corporations at the expense of people’s health.

By Monty Herron, originally posted on October 20, 2016

One of the interesting things about the Pacific Northwest, in my opinion, is how informed the denizens are about current events. The number of informed citizens rises even higher if it is a sustainability issue. So with that having been said, I think you’d have to be living under a rock to not have heard of, know about, or have an opinion regarding the Dakota Access Pipeline. The Dakota Access Pipeline (Dapl) is another pipeline designed to carry lower-grade oil from the Bakken shale area, and Three Forks. It follows a route eerily similar to the route Keystone XL was supposed to take to traverse the middle of our country. In the initial proposal, Dakota Access wanted to run their ‘green snake’ right through parts of Bismarck, N.D. Understandably, the citizens of Bismarck wanted nothing to do with a pipeline in their front yard. So Dakota Access reconfigured the pipeline to traverse vast tracts of prairie land, Native American lands, sacred burial sites, and other places of cultural importance. Let’s compare and contrast, shall we?

“The Dakota Access Pipeline Project is a new approximate 1,172-mile, 30-inch diameter pipeline that will connect the rapidly expanding Bakken and Three Forks production areas in North Dakota to Patoka, Illinois. The pipeline will enable domestically produced light sweet crude oil from North Dakota to reach major refining markets in a more direct, cost-effective, safer and environmentally responsible manner. The pipeline will also reduce the current use of rail and truck transportation to move Bakken crude oil to major U.S. markets to support domestic demand.

It will transport approximately 470,000 barrels per day with a capacity as high as 570,000 barrels per day or more – which could represent roughly half of Bakken current daily crude oil production. Shippers will be able to access multiple markets, including Midwest and East Coast markets as well as the Gulf Coast via the Nederland, Texas crude oil terminal facility of Sunoco Logistics Partners.

Depending upon regulatory approvals, the pipeline is projected to be in service by the fourth quarter of 2016”. (1)

“It’s Keystone XL all over again: The Dakota Access Pipeline would carry 450,000 barrels of dirty oil per day from North Dakota to Illinois and cut through fragile wildlife habitat, environmentally sensitive areas, and sovereign tribal property. Worse, the pipeline would cross under the Missouri River, threatening drinking water downstream if a catastrophic oil spill occurs”. (2)

The Missouri River provides drinking water for roughly 18 million people. When an oil spill happens, the local ecology NEVER fully recovers. I selected the words “When an oil spill happens” because it is never a question of “if” but “when” they will have a catastrophe. We do not have the resources or infrastructure in the United States to handle a sudden loss of drinking water for 18 million people. This is the primary reason why those who are working to stop the pipeline have called themselves “ Water Protectors not Protestors.” Another beautiful thing to know about #NoDapl is that the movement itself was started by tribal youth and tribal women. The pipeline would cut through lands that are sacred to the Standing Rock Sioux, out of Fort Yates, N.D. They are the core constituency of the Oceti Sakowin camp and the tribal nation that put the initial call out for help in their fight. Since then, representatives and tribal members from more than 300 Native American nations have come to show their support, deliver supplies, or assist with the daily work of supporting 5-7 camps, that house approximately 3-5,000 people at any given time.

Last month I was fortunate enough to make the long journey to Cannon Ball, N.D. with a truck full of supplies, and money to purchase more goods as needed. This trip was made possible by distinguished members of Oregon’s LGBTQIA community, and tribal members and elders of the Confederated Tribes of Grand Ronde. It was awe-inspiring to see so many Native people, from all the corners of the continent, pitching in, to show love and support for another tribal nation. I have wept several times when I try to describe the camp or have reflected on my time there. I don’t want to go into too much detail about the camps, what potential supporters and allies need to know is this: The #NoDapl Water Protectors are peaceful. They have daily prayer meetings, they make a prayer/meditation walk from the main camp up the highway to the Dakota Access-violated burial grounds and back to the main camp, every day at Noon. These folks are incredibly well organized. Supplies are redistributed so every camp has what they need. They are efficient and committed to seeing this through.

While I was in camp, I had the honor of meeting Myron Dewey, (Social Media Specialist) of DigitalSmokeSignals.com, at the media tent. Myron has an excellent Facebook page to follow, where he posts almost daily about the current situation on the site. Myron encourages everyone to get the word out about this pipeline. The mainstream media are ignoring what is happening there. The Oceti Sakowin people are in control of their own narrative, and they will not let anyone else determine it for them. To that end, the Standing Rock Sioux have compiled this list of demands:

Any impacted tribe must be consulted about the project, and give their consent before any workers cross their lands. They ask that the Army Corps of Engineers reject any permits for this ‘too risky’ pipeline. Conduct a full EIS as required by the National Environmental Policy Act. (Environmental Impact Statement) Last, they are asking President Obama to use the same climate litmus test he established when assessing the Keystone XL- to now evaluate the Dakota Access Pipeline.

The chairman of the Standing Rock tribe, Dave Archambault, gave testimony to the United Nations in Geneva last week. A resolution put to the vote easily passed with a vast majority of the Assembly, reaffirming the rights of Indigenous people to have control over their lands, culture, and determine their own futures. President Obama has asked Dakota Access to halt construction near the water sources, with a 20-mile buffer to each side; however, as recently as Monday, Oct. 10th, there was still Dakota Access workers and equipment 4 miles inside the boundaries. There are legally questionable tactics now being employed by the Morton County sheriff’s department. They have started showing up with armored vehicles, riot gear, and scores of men and guns; to disrupt the daily, peaceful prayer meetings.

There are no easy answers in this fight, there will not be a quick resolution, but the Oceti Sakowin are going to stay all winter if need be. For the first time in approximately 150 years, Natives are uniting for common cause and purpose. If you can help, here is a comprehensive list of places to send money, gift cards, and needed supplies to.

If you want to send supplies directly, you can mail them to:

Sacred Stone Camp
P.O. Box 1011
Fort Yates, ND 58538

-OR-

Standing Rock Sioux Tribe
Attention: Donations
PO Box D
Building #1
North Standing Rock Avenue
Fort Yates, ND 58538

To send supplies to the kids at the Defenders of the Water School, please purchase items on the Amazon wish list…please DO NOT send more school supplies:  https://www.amazon.com/gp/aw/ls/ref=?ie=UTF8&%2AVersion%2A=1&%2Aentries%2A=0&lid=2TWHPQPUIH1IV&ty=wishlist

You can donate directly to the Standing Rock Sioux Tribe at their PayPal:http://standingrock.org/news/standing-rock-sioux-tribe–dakota-access-pipeline-donation-fund/

Here is the Sacred Stone Camp Amazon Wish List:https://www.amazon.com/gp/registry/wishlist/ref=sr_1_1_acs_wl_1?cid=A2U35DV1L7IRMA&ie=UTF8&qid=1472511370&sr=8-1-acs

Sacred Stone Camp direct funding: https://www.gofundme.com/sacredstonecamp
OR BY PayPal: sacredstonecamp@gmail.com
OR you can contribute to the Sacred Stone Camp legal fund to get representation for those who have been arrested and/or physically attacked by Dakota Access: https://fundrazr.com/d19fAf?ref=sh_25rPQa

Red Warrior Camp direct funding: http://oweakuinternational.org/
OR you can donate directly to the Red Warrior legal fund to get representation for those who have been arrested and/or physically attacked by Dakota Access:https://www.generosity.com/fundraising/red-warrior-camp-legal-fund-nodapl

Oglala Camp direct funding: https://www.gofundme.com/2pvyezb8

To help winterize the large, Oceti Sakowin Camp and keep water protectors on site this winter:  https://www.crowdrise.com/winterize-water-protectors-camp

To support a women’s healing, wellness, and birthing center at Camp:
https://www.gofundme.com/2mxpggc

Please send medical supplies directly to:

Wasté Win Young
950 Meadowlark Street
Fort Yates ND 58538

Please send herbs and traditional medicines directly to:

Linda Black Elk
P.O. Box 924
Mobridge, SD 57601

By Candice Williams, originally posted on October 20, 2016

An adviser for Gov. Rick Snyder has offered to arrange a deal for the city of Flint to purchase treated water from Genesee County on a temporary, emergency basis.

In a letter dated Oct. 11, Special Adviser Rich Baird wrote to Flint Mayor Karen Weaver and Drain Commissioner Jeffrey Wright, noting his concern that the city may lose access to clean drinking water in October 2017.

The city expects to have its water treatment plant ready to treat water from the Karegnondi Water Authority in the spring, however its chosen backup water source, a raw water reservoir, won’t be ready until October 2017. That’s the same time the city loses access to treated water from the Great Lakes Water Authority.

“The city’s backup water source plan is to construct a raw water reservoir to supply the Flint Water Treatment Plant in the event the KWA raw water line was temporarily out of service,” Baird said. “Since the raw water reservoir cannot be constructed by October 2017, an emergency backup plan must be in place.”

The Genesee County Drain Commissioner’s Office plans to have its new water treatment plant ready by October 2017. This would include using the same 72-inch transmission line that the Great Lakes Water Authority uses to supply water to the city of Flint. When the Genesee County Drain Commission begins using the line, the city will lose access to the Great Lakes Water Authority as a primary or backup source, Baird said.

Baird requested to meet within 30 days.

Flint River water was untreated with corrosion control in 2014 when it switched from Detroit’s water system to the Flint River. Water leached lead into the city’s water system and into service lines leading into homes. Tests later showed high lead levels in some Flint children.

Weaver said Thursday she plans to reach out to the drain commission next week to set up a meeting. She said that while she’s open to having a conversation about the issue, she is focused on the city becoming self sufficient in supplying its own water.

“It’s an interesting idea,” she said. “I’ve always been in favor of us doing our own. Really. Flint doing their own water treatment … I know they were talking about something temporary. That’s why I say I’m willing to sit down and have a conversation.”

By George McGraw, originally posted on October 201, 2016

LOS ANGELES — Most Americans take safe water for granted: Turn the tap, and there it is. But recent protests against the Dakota Access pipeline on the Standing Rock Reservation in South Dakota are a reminder that some Americans still worry every day about having enough clean water to survive.

As events in Standing Rock and Flint, Mich., capture national attention, long-running water emergencies fester in near-total obscurity elsewhere across the country, many of them on native reservations.

Nearly 24,000 Native American and Alaska Native households somehow manage without access to running water or basic sanitation, according to 2015 figures from the Indian Health Service, living in what my organization calls “water poverty.” About 188,000 such households were in need of some form of water and sanitation facilities improvement.

Perhaps the worst case is on the sprawling Navajo reservation in the Southwest, home to about 170,000 people.

I found this out only inadvertently, though I run Digdeep, a nonprofit group focused on improving access to clean water in some of the places you might expect: South Sudan and Cameroon. But not in the United States.

In 2013, a woman called our office to make a sizable donation, with the stipulation that we spend it in the United States. I told her that her gift would be better spent in the developing world, but she was adamant that we use it on the Navajo reservation in New Mexico.

So I drove the 10 hours from my Los Angeles home to Thoreau, N.M., part of the Navajo Nation. The reservation is the country’s largest, covering parts of Utah, Arizona and New Mexico.

There, I was greeted by Darlene Arviso, a Navajo known as “the water lady.” I rode with her in a 3,500-gallon tank truck, and we delivered water free to 10 households across the arid high-desert plateau.

The first home we visited belonged to Lindsay Johnson. The house had no running water or electricity; a car battery powered the TV. Ms. Arviso took out a hose and everyone grabbed cups, bowls, buckets and barrels to store the water.

There’s not much water in the high desert — and much of what’s there is bad. Large parts of the reservation lack any water-supply equipment. The low population density makes building a water distribution system economically unfeasible. Tribal members rely on surface water and shallow aquifers, many of which have been poisoned by uranium mining.

Ms. Arviso explained that because of high demand for her service and the remoteness of the Johnson home, she is able to deliver only 400 gallons of water to the family each month. That amounts to less than three gallons of water per person, per day. (The typical American uses about 100.) The Johnsons use the same water to wash dishes and their hair, and finally pour what’s left into the toilet tank. They invariably run out of water before Ms. Arviso’s next visit.

Benjamin Lewis, a retired miner, lives 30 miles from the Johnsons. Before Ms. Arviso began delivering water, Mr. Lewis relied on a water trough meant for sheep that is supplied by a well pumped by a windmill. That water tested positive for uranium in 1976. More recent tests have been positive for nitrites. Some neighbors still use the sheep tank in emergencies.

While about 6 percent of American Indian and Alaska Natives live in water poverty, the problem is not confined to the reservations. About a half a million American households lack basic plumbing amenities like hot water, a tap or toilet, according to the Census Bureau. As in Flint, they are disproportionately poor and minority.

In the Coachella Valley, southeast of Los Angeles, for instance, low-income and undocumented farm workers living in trailer parks endure open sewage ditches and contaminated drinking water.

I visited one of the worst of these parks, Duroville, before a federal court closed it in 2013. More than 4,000 people lived in a park built for 500. Tenants complained that they were forced to pay their landlord up to 30 percent of their income for delivery of drinking water that made them sick. While most of these families have been resettled, similar conditions persist in the nearby localities of Thermal and Mecca.

Pockets of water poverty exist in nearly every state, particularly in rural Appalachia and New England, and in the “colonias” along the border with Mexico.

These conditions shouldn’t persist. Even relatively inexpensive and simple solutions can have a profound impact.

In Thoreau, we optimized Ms. Arviso’s delivery route, outfitted a second water truck and hired a new driver, doubling the delivery capacity for only $64,000. Last winter, we began installing cisterns and electric pumps for 204 homes; when the project is finished, hot water will flow from taps and showers at a cost of less than $4,000 per household. This spring, we will break ground on a 1,500-foot-deep well close to the Johnsons’ house, expanding water delivery to more homes.

Ending water poverty in the United States will require a concerted effort. Nonprofits can play an important role by working with communities to develop low-tech, low-cost solutions. These programs should be managed with the communities to ensure they are sustainable. Federal and state government should focus on water-supply and sanitation projects with the goal of making these local programs unnecessary someday.

With dedication and money, water poverty on the Navajo Nation could be eradicated within a decade. That would be a powerful start.

By Lisa Nikolau, originally posted on October 19, 2016

If Latin America is to gain more ground on the fight against poverty, children need better access to basic resources like running water and sanitation, according to newly released data from the World Bank.

The World Bank’s 2016 Human Opportunity Index (HOI): Seeking Opportunities for All, measures children’s access to necessary services such as education, water and sanitation, electricity and internet. The report had some good news about Latin America’s progress on fighting poverty: the percentage of people living in extreme poverty dropped dramatically between 2000 and 2014 (25.5 percent to 10.8 percent). The region also now boasts over 90 percent coverage in access to electricity and school enrollment.

But the analysis also found that the poverty rate has since been declining at a much slower pace since 2012 as a result of the economic slowdown, and some countries in Latin America are still lacking access to internet, safe drinking water and sanitation. Thirty million Latin Americans today don’t have easy access to clean water, according to the report, even though the region is home to 31 percent of world’s freshwater resources.

Access varies dramatically among countries; Argentina and Uruguay have the best access to water and sanitation, for example, while the violence-riddled country of El Salvador has the worst in all of Latin America and the Caribbean.

There are also enormous discrepancies between rural communities and urban areas, since cities have seen more rapid improvements in infrastructure for water and sanitation services. Across Latin America, some 100 million people still lack access to any sanitation, with rural access at just 60 percent. According to the report, rates of access range from near universal coverage to less than a fifth within individual countries.

According to Oscar Calvo-Gonzalez, author of the report and World Bank practice manager for poverty and equity in Latin America and the Caribbean, this type of disadvantage can translate into setbacks for children – and, in turn, the fight against poverty – across the region.

“Unequal access to essential services can hinder the development and well-being of children, which ultimately limits their productivity in adult life and affects the region’s potential to boost growth and further reduce poverty in the long term,” said Calvo-Gonzalez in a press release. “Unfortunately, having parents with low education and income, as well as living in rural areas, remain important barriers for access to opportunities and economic mobility from one generation to the next.”

Experts say many Latin American countries will need to invest in distribution systems and other infrastructure to be able to allocate water across sectors to spur economic development, and to be able to provide improved sanitation in remote or rural areas. These and other issues are being addressed at this week’s Habitat III summit, a U.N. conference taking place in Quito, Ecuador, to focus on equitable urban development.

Experts predict that in just 14 years, the world will face a catastrophic water deficit.

-By Reynard Loki, originally posted on October 18, 2016

For millions of people across the world, access to clean water so they can drink, cook and wash, is a daily struggle. In many rural, impoverished communities, fetching water is an arduous task that falls upon women and children.

In Africa and Asia, women and children must walk 3.7 miles on average to get their water. Collectively, women spend over 200 million hours every day just collecting water. That’s more than just a major inconvenience, it’s an incredible amount of lost economic potential.

This time-consuming, physically exhausting endeavor prevents women from working at jobs and keeps children away from school, impacts that continue a cycle of poverty and socioeconomic exclusion. For the women and children who live in one small village in Kenya, their walk to water is more than five miles. And the water they gather isn’t even clean; it comes from a dirty river containing harmful bacteria.

These villagers are not alone. Around 783 million people—11 percent of the world’s population—don’t have access to clean water, which can be deadly. Lack of clean water and sanitation is the ultimate cause of approximately 3.5 million deaths every year.

It’s a major crisis that could become even worse if nations don’t fully address it—soon. Water is a finite natural resource, and it’s getting scarcer as the global population steadily increases. By 2030, only 60 percent of humanity’s demand for water will be met by existing resources at the current rate of use, according to the U.N. That means four out of 10 people will be without access to water.

“I’ve met people in a number of different countries who are impacted by the water crisis,” said Matt Damon, who is the co-founder of Water.org, a charity that helps communities design and construct sustainable water supply systems.

In a video interview, the actor and activist described a trip to Ethiopia where he watched children retrieve water from a hand-dug well he described as a “filthy hole.” “The water looked like chocolate milk,” he said. “They were aware of the dangers of drinking that water, but they just didn’t have a choice.”

It was a long time coming, but finally, in 2010, the United Nations General Assembly recognized that water and sanitation should be basic human rights. “Safe drinking water and adequate sanitation are crucial for poverty reduction, crucial for sustainable development and crucial for achieving any and every one of the Millennium Development Goals,” said U.N. Secretary-General Ban Ki-Moon.

In addition, improved water and sanitation can help fight hunger, achieve universal primary education, promote gender equality and empower women, reduce child mortality, improve maternal health, reduce the impact of climate change, protect biodiversity, prevent regional conflict and combat a wide range of diseases, including malaria and HIV/AIDS.

There has been progress. Between 1990 and 2015, 2.6 billion people gained access to improved drinking water sources. Much of that progress was due to nations meeting the U.N.’s Millennium Development Goals. Notably, the MDGs’ target of halving the proportion of people without access to improved sources of water was met five years ahead of schedule.

But despite these impressive gains, 2.4 billion people are still using unimproved sanitation facilities, including 946 million people who are still practicing open defecation. India has the highest number, around 190 million people, practicing open defecation, mostly in rural areas. This has led to a number of health impacts, including typhoid, cholera, hepatitis, polio, trachoma, intestinal worm infections and infectious diarrhea, which kills 760,000 children under the age of five worldwide every single year.

The lack of sanitation and access to clean water also has a tremendous economic impact, not least of all by keeping women out of the economic engine and kids out of school. “Doing nothing is costly,” says U.N. Deputy Secretary-General Jan Eliasson. “Every $1 spent on sanitation brings a $5.50 return by keeping people healthy and productive.” According to World Bank estimates, poor sanitation costs India an estimated $53.8 billion (6.4% of GDP), Pakistan $4.2 billion (6.3% GDP) and Cambodia $448 million (7.2% GDP).

“Infrastructure improvements are the most pressing need in addressing these deficits,” Jackson Ewing, director of Asian Sustainability at Asia Society Policy Institute, told AlterNet. “Progress on WASH [water, sanitation and hygiene] requires financial prioritization from governments and capital from development banks and private investment” He added that “the case must be made to finance ministries in places like South and Southeast Asia that more resources should be allocated to improving water supply, building sanitary toilets, and rolling back water pollution.”

Getting governments to prioritize water issues can be tricky. In many parts of the world, as throughout human history, water is a highly valued and guarded resource. Put another way, you don’t want your enemies to have water. From the Middle East to Africa, from the Indian subcontinent to Asia, many nations have been willing to go to extremes not only to protect their water security, but to use water as a military weapon.

“Geopolitics and a history of cross-border disputes have meant that transboundary water issues are perceived largely from a perspective of national security,” writes Mandakini Devasher Surie, the Asia Foundation’s senior program officer in India.” She says that a “highly securitized approach has severely limited access to water and climate data.” By not sharing critical regional water data, Surie argues, it is difficult to get an accurate assessment of water availability. And you can’t solve the problem if you don’t know the extent of it.

To be sure, the water crisis has primarily impacted the developing world, but with ongoing water pollution concerns and climate impacts such as drought, wildfires and marine dead zones increasingly troubling rich nations across Europe and North America, developed countries are coming to realize that they are not immune.

“We don’t know anyone who goes thirsty,” said Water.org’s Damon. “We have faucets everywhere. Our toilet water is cleaner than what 663 million people drink. The crisis in Flint, Michigan, ironically, is one of the first times, at least in my memory, that Americans have become aware of just how necessary clean water is, and the dire consequences of not having it.”

In fact, the residents of Flint may have had their human rights violated due to the unavailability of clean water. At least nine current and former Michigan state employees face charges relating to allegations they covered up information about the lead contamination of Flint’s drinking water. “The fact that Flint residents have not had regular access to safe drinking water and sanitation since April 2014 is a potential violation of their human rights,” said Léo Heller, the U.N. Special Rapporteur on the human right to safe drinking water and sanitation.

When it comes to access to clean water and sanitation, we have come a long way. But with a larger water availability crisis looming, a rapidly growing population, and other concerns occupying the focus of world leaders, it’s clear that ensuring this basic human right could be humanity’s greatest challenge.

By Stephanie Clark, originally posted on October 18, 2016

At around 2:30 p.m. on Monday Oct. 17 the Virgin Valley Water District (VVWD) began receiving a flood of phone calls from residents in Sun City who suddenly went without water.

According to VVWD Manager Kevin Brown, a vital 16” plastic water pipe that feeds water into Sun City broke due to a variety of factors including older pipe probably installed in 2005 or 2006 and left in the sun too long before installation.

Brown said the pipe brand was known to be faulty and it was installed on top of a rock without enough sand base to protect it. Installers may have over-inserted it into a connecting pipe causing additional problems.

“This was the second, and hopefully last, major pipe break in two years for Sun City,” said Brown.

Partial water pressure was restored to residents in Sun City within an hour of losing the water and full repairs were completed around 9 p.m. Monday night.

“The VVWD staff did another great job of quickly restoring water to residents,” Brown said of their response time.

DEC denies permit for controversial National Fuel pipeline.
The state Department of Environmental Conservation has rejected National Fuel’s plans for a 97-mile pipeline to carry natural gas from northwestern Pennsylvania to Elma.
The DEC determined there was too big a threat to water quality and wildlife to grant National Fuel the water quality certificate required to construct the Northern Access Pipeline.
"After an in-depth review of the proposed Northern Access Pipeline project and following three public hearings and the consideration of over 5,700 comments, DEC has denied the permit due to the project’s failure to avoid adverse impacts to wetlands, streams and fish and other wildlife habitat," the DEC announced.
"We are confident that this decision supports our state’s strict water quality standards that all New Yorkers depend on," the DEC statement added.
Environmental groups and residents raised concern about threats the pipeline posed to water quality, including its planned crossing of Cattaraugus Creek, which is the sole source drinking water aquifer for residents in a 325-square-mile area.
DEC officials determined National Fuel’s plans did not "avoid or adequately mitigate" impacts that could harm water quality and associated resources.
Last April, the DEC denied a water quality permit to the Constitution Pipeline.
Another Pendleton resident and a leader of the action team, Paula Hargreaves, said the DEC’s findings confirmed what her organization had been saying all along.
Hargreaves called the DEC’s findings a victory in a single "battle" and said the organization intends to remain vigilant in anticipation of the gas company resubmitting their plans.

by Phillip Lucas, originally posted on June 3, 2016

COURTLAND, Ala. (AP) — Lisa Davis, a cashier at a Foodvalu grocery store in rural north Alabama, spent Friday ringing up bottled water sales after a local utility declared its tap water unfit to drink because of chemical contamination.

Some customers got a six-pack; others bought jugs or a whole case. The scene was the same across the street at a Dollar General store, where a big metal cart once full of bottled water stood empty.

The run on water began Thursday afternoon, when officials with the West Morgan-East Limestone Water and Sewer Authority held a news conference to warn the utility’s 10,000 residential and business customers in parts of two counties to not drink or cook with tap water because of chemical contamination.

Davis, 41, said she and her two children will be fine during a dry spell that officials said could last until fall. But she’s worried about the less fortunate and elderly who may not have extra money to spend on bottled water.

“These older people who are on a fixed income can’t just go out and buy water,” she said. “They are paying water bills.”

The scare comes as other states are dealing with serious water-contamination issues: In Flint, Michigan, where tests found lead in tap water earlier this year, officials are still distributing bottled water to residents. In West Virginia, lawsuits and an investigation are ongoing over the release of toxic chemicals into the Elk River in 2014.

The West Morgan-East Limestone utility has long been aware of the presence of perfluorooctanoic acid and perfluorooctane sulfonate in its water system, but the levels of the chemicals were within acceptable levels defined by former Environmental Protection Agency guidelines. Last month, however, the EPA lowered its recommended levels for the chemicals. It said water systems with combined levels of 70 parts per trillion of the chemicals in drinking water should advise customers of the potential health risks and take steps to reduce the chemicals.

The chemicals, commonly called PFOA and PFOS, have been used to make fabrics, packaging and coatings for cookware, according to an EPA fact sheet. Studies indicate that exposure to PFOA and PFOS above certain levels may result in problems including low birth weight, accelerated puberty, cancer, liver damage and immune-system effects, according to the EPA.

Under its new guidelines, the EPA says pregnant women and breastfeeding mothers should not drink the water and that it should not be used in baby formula.

West Morgan-East Lawrence’s general manager, Don Sims, went further after recent tests of the local water found levels almost 60 percent higher than the new EPA limit.

“I would rather be overcautious than under-cautious,” Sims said during a news conference. “I’m not a doctor; I’m not a chemist. But when they tell one class of people the water is not safe, I don’t want to be the one to say, ‘You drink it and you don’t.’ So I said, ‘Nobody drink it.'”

A temporary filtration system to purify the water won’t be ready before September, officials said, and a permanent solution could be three years away.

Dr. Jim McVay, a spokesman with the Alabama Department of Public Health, said the authority made the announcement without consulting health or environmental officials. The Health Department is sticking with EPA guidance that warns only some to avoid the water, he said.

“That’s the best science we have,” McVay said.

Gov. Robert Bentley said in a statement that the local decision “effectively turned an advisory into a regulation.”

“Based on my current understanding, I am confident that there is no health-related crisis based on the water quality of the West Morgan East Lawrence Water Authority,” Bentley said.

The utility’s latest warning comes amid an ongoing lawsuit that it filed against 3M and other manufacturing companies along the Tennessee River last year, blaming them for polluting the river with industrial chemicals.

A Texas law firm representing 3M in the lawsuit released statements defending the company’s actions and saying the EPA was being overly conservative with its advisories about the chemicals.

“3M’s activities in connection with these materials were not only fully permitted but entirely appropriate,” said company attorney William A. Brewer III. “In any event, we believe the claims against 3M — and recent actions taken by the water authority — are based upon the mistaken belief that the mere presence of these chemicals equals harm.”

That may be true, but Davis said she isn’t taking chances. The cashier doubles as a secretary at the volunteer fire department, and she said she plans to spend the weekend notifying older residents not to drink their tap water.