What New York can do to prevent water diversions

What New York can do to prevent water diversions

Story Options

The question seems absurd and the answer very logical. Does it make more sense to inefficiently move water thousands of miles to arid regions of the country with growing populations in sprawling communities, or require arid communities to live within their limited water budget and encourage movement of people in the opposite direction from arid, unsustainable regions to communities carefully managing their freshwater (in addition to affordable housing)?

While the answer is a no-brainer, even obvious solutions often have to become law to work. The Great Lakes-St Lawrence Water Resources Compact is an interstate compact that is attempting to prevent devastating water diversions from areas outside of the Great Lakes basin from occurring. While the governors and premiers of the states and provinces have already singed a similar agreement, and the Canadian provinces have already taken action, for it to become state and federal law, all of the participating state legislatures must approved the Compact.

So far only two states, Minnesota and Illinois have enacted the Compact to Law. As we speak, Indiana’s bill has passed the House and Senate and is waiting to be signed into law, and the Pennsylvania bill has passed the House. In New York State, the Senate and Legislature are also working on this bill. While both the state Assembly and Senate have passed the bill, technical issues prevented the bill from becoming law in the last legislative term. After the Senate Environmental Conservation Committee and Assembly Codes Committee reported out on the Compact last week, the bill is now on the Senate floor. In the Assembly, the Ways and Means committee must advance the bill to the full Assembly.

It is crucial to let our representatives in Albany know how important passing the Compact is to preventing Great Lakes water diversions. Now is the time to contact those individuals that represent the residents of the shores of Lake Erie.

Assembly members:

Sam Hoyt (716-885-9630 Buffalo, 518-455-4886 Albany)

Mark Schroeder (716-826-0152 Buffalo, 518-455-4691 Albany)

Crystal Peoples (716-897-9714 Buffalo, 518-455-5005 Albany)

State Senators:

Antoine Thompson (716-854-8705 Buffalo, 518-455-3371 Albany)

William Stachowski(716-826-3344 Buffalo,518- 455-2426 Albany).

Buffalo and western New York are intrinsically linked to Lake Erie, Lake Ontario and the connecting Buffalo-Niagara Rivers. Our health and success as a region and economy will suffer if we continue to take this amazing resource for granted. If we do not take care of our lakes, any one can claim them. If our supposed economic revival will come at the shores of the Lake, we can no longer put it at risk.

(Continuation of previous posts from Great Lakes United – Click here to see previous posts)

digulios

What Others Have To Say

  1. flyguy

    1 ratings12345
    Feb 1st, 10:52

    Want the advantages of havning an abundance of fresh water nearby then MOVE to it! This idea of diverting the great lakes to arrid regions is ludacris and should never be supported. You go to where the resource is you dont bring it to you. Too dry in Tucson, Las Vegas, Phoenix, etc? Tough, you moved there, buyer beware. Want to fix the problem? Start moving to the great lakes and start repopulating the cities there. If it was sun and warm air that attracted millions to relocate out of the great lakes region then it should be water and sustainable environments that pull people back.

  2. flyguy

    1 ratings12345
    Feb 1st, 10:57

    In addition the US government really should make an effort to start driving economic development forces away from these unsustainable areas and into more sustainable environments. Bring the jobs and growth back so people can feasibly move to the great lakes region and repopulate the cities. No more now now now type of thinking in Washington to make a quick buck in the next hot area. We need comprehensive long range economic planning that considers the environmental implications of our economic growth policies and where money is pumped. How about bringing the jobs back onto domestic soils as well? Because everything is strictly profit driven these days and the economy really doesnt consider the greater good and has lost its soul I doubt this will ever happen and its just sad.

  3. wizardofza

    0 ratings12345
    Feb 1st, 11:32

    You don't understand, flyguy, the American Way of Life (AWOL) is all about defying nature. We're AMERICANS, we do don't have to abide my mother nature's pussy laws! Wanna live on a golf course cul-de-sac in the middle of the freakin' desert? No problem, just steal water from those freezing cold, high-tax loser cities up north!

  4. sbrof

    1 ratings12345
    Feb 1st, 12:13

    Every area of the planet can support a sustainable level of human habitation... Many places in the country, in fact planet are exceeding those levels. At some point we as a country, government and socially need to tax people the actual costs of doing business and living in such unsustainable regions. The great lakes can support a huge human population, if done correctly, densely. Suburban sprawl from Buffalo to Chicago isn't a viable option either.

    Sure people have the right to choose where to live, but we shouldn't start getting into the game of subsidizing them when their water because to expensive to drill or desalinate.

    BTW BRO should have a standing list of all politicians for the buffalo area in some sort of contacts page. EMAILS TOO!

  5. InformedOne

    1 ratings12345
    Feb 1st, 14:13

    The problem with a free society is people are free to choose where and how they live, even if it is not in the best interest of society as a whole. Unfortunately we all bear the burden of subsidizing these poor choices for example people are free to smoke cancer sticks/society as a whole pays for increases in heath care costs, people are free to build expensive houses on erosion prone hillsides and beach fronts/society as a whole pays the costs for beach replacement and increases in insurance premiums,people are free to choose to drive gas guzzling SUV's/ we all suffer from greenhouse gas emissions and shortage in fuel supplies. As sbrof suggested we need to capture these poor choices and those who are making them should bear the burden of the costs. To tax all of these individual choices would be cumbersome and amount to another government behemoth entity. Stop subsidizing these poor choices through removing subsidies to the oil industry, real estate developers and so forth would be a much more manageable lift. The problem is how entrenched the politicos currently are in the system of continuing to support these industries and their successive lobbyists and legislation. Maybe Obama does actually represent movement towards these ends. Additionally Ron Paul offers some libertarian ideals of less government intervention, a truly "free-market" would weed out these poor choices through the removal of subsidies and government manipulation.

  6. BuffaloDave

    1 ratings12345
    Feb 1st, 16:27

    If you ask for free market, be prepared to suffer the consequences. I would not put myself on the left side of the aisle at all, but in this case I am bothered. I sit here in Buffalo and work hard and do everything I can to do my part, only to watch others move out of town to places that don't have any sustainability. And that is fine - EXCEPT when you try to pirate our resources. If you want to go, then go, but don't take our competitive advantage from us. The free market, short term thinking might allow you to move somewhere at a whim, but do not think that we are going to want to subsidize you when you are gone. This legislation is critically important, and if we hang on to our natural, environmental advantages, we will welcome back those who have left, along with those who may have never been here. It's our turn!

  7. RisingDamp666

    0 ratings12345
    Feb 2nd, 22:36

    What a strangely defensive and falsely defiant comment, Buffalo Dav: "don't take our competitive advantage from us?" What a real competitor says is: Go ahead and take our water, we will bill you to bankruptcy, siphon off your ideas and human capital in the process, and then bury you and anyone else. Don't cry over somebody else grabbing at you, grab something off of them and don't stop 'till their bones are dry.

  8. jermaine

    0 ratings12345
    Feb 5th, 11:12

    I think this is a good attempt by the surrounding lake areas to try to hold on to the water. The bottom line is though that the areas do not own the water in the lakes and unfortunately the US government will do what they please with it.

Would you like to subscribe to this conversation?

Enter your email below, and you will receive an alert each time someone leaves a comment on this post.

What Do You Think?

Text Links