Badin vs. Fredericktown
Miamisburg graduation 2012
Valley View vs. Greenville
Ellen Belcher is the Dayton Daily News opinion pages editor. She writes about state government, education, the environment, higher education and all things Dayton.
Martin Gottlieb is an editorial writer and columnist for the Dayton Daily News opinion pages. He focuses on the political process itself and does such national issues as war, the economy, taxes and Social Security, as well as a hodge-podge of local and state issues.
Scott Elliott is an editorial writer and columnist for the Dayton Daily News opinion pages. He writes about education, city and suburban issues, politics, business, workforce and consumer issues.Home > Blogs > A Matter of Opinion > Archives > 2010 > July > 22 > Entry
Guest column: Farm runoff problem can be solved, with big effort
This column was written by Lima resident Tim Lovett, who is president of the Grand Lake St. Marys Improvement Association.
Fact is, an economic and environmental disaster is occurring in the region around Grand Lake St. Marys. Jobs and businesses are being lost and home values and tourist income are falling due to the lake’s poor water quality. Strains of blue-green algae growing in the lake are producing toxins that are hazardous to humans, resulting in public health advisories to avoid contact with the water.
Blue-green algae are thriving because of the excessive phosphorus in the lake’s sediment and in runoff flowing into the lake. The phosphorous originates primarily from agricultural sources. These facts have been well documented by federal and state environmental protection agencies and the Ohio Department of Natural Resources.
It is also a fact that the lake can be restored, once again making it the driver of a thriving recreational and tourism industry in the region. A recently completed study of the lake’s problems concludes that a two-pronged approach is required:
Stop the excessive phosphorous coming into the lake and remove most of the phosphorous being released by the sediment.
There are proven best-management practices available to the agricultural producers that can reduce phosphorous in runoff. If those practices were adopted by the entire agricultural community in the lake’s watershed, phosphorous would be reduced to a level that would sustain a healthy lake.
Many producers in the watershed have adopted these practices — and they’re to be commended. But the practices must be adopted on a much larger scale if the lake is going to be saved.
Efforts by various governmental and private entities are continuing to encourage producers to adopt these practices and to offer financial incentives to do so.
Controlling the release of phosphorous from lake sediment is technically feasible. A variety of technologies exist, and one or more may be required. That effort will cost millions, and identifying the necessary funding sources will be difficult.
But weighed against the more than 2,000 jobs tied to the lake’s recreational and tourist industry, this is a wise investment.
The state and federal government are spending millions to save jobs in Ohio; some of those funds need to be diverted to saving the lake and the jobs it provides.
The problem with excessive nutrients on agricultural runoff causing algae problems is not just a Grand Lake St. Marys issue. It is a state and federal issue. It is a problem in the Mississippi River basin and in the Great Lakes.
Grand Lake St. Marys has a relatively small runoff zone. If the problem cannot be corrected here, there is not much hope for everywhere else.
I am cautiously optimistic that the lake can and will be cleaned up and that the region’s economy will be restored. We and many other organizations are committed to making this happen.
Permalink | Comments (3) | Post your comment |
Comments
By Rick
July 23, 2010 7:54 AM | Link to this
Not to cry over spilled milk… but, this problem should have been avoided/predicted… Now it will take extraordinary efforts straining resources to fix. Another fine example of a man made mess!
By Truth Is
July 23, 2010 9:27 AM | Link to this
No community can afford to lose $200M in today’s economy but this problem didn’t fall out of the sky. it’s been on going for several years and not addressed as it should have been. Now the community must “bite the bullet” a lot like comparing now to the Bush years.
By JS
July 23, 2010 10:00 AM | Link to this
Rick, Truth Is, you’re pointing out an obvious societal problem. We put off solving problems because of short-term losses. I can guarantee that the argument for not fixing this before always had to do with cost to the farmers and how much they’d lose, so nobody pushed the issue until it was too late. This happens in all over. It’s not just a community thing, either; it happens in every level, from your smallest town to the federal government. Corporations do the same thing, taking the cheap, easy way for the quicker buck and not worrying about the long-term consequences. Why do you think we’re in the mess we’re in economically?