« Ind. Law - Is timely special election to replace Souder mandated by law? | Main | Ind. Decisions - Supreme Court decides two today »

Tuesday, May 25, 2010

Environment - Still more on "Indiana county's fertilizer ban rejected"

Updating this important Feb. 14, 2010 ILB entry headed "Indiana county's fertilizer ban rejected" about how Steuben County's effort to put in place an ordinance to protect its lakes by restricting phosphorus lawn fertilizers was denied by the state chemist, yesterday Jason Thomas of the Indianapolis Star had a lengthy story on phosphorus affecting water quality in Indiana. The story does not seem to be available on the Star site, although some part of it is here at a related site. Some quotes:

“It’s a huge problem,” said Lenore P. Tedesco, associate professor of geology at Indiana University-Purdue University Indianapolis. “I would argue that the vast majority of water in Indiana has an excess of phosphorus, which is causing changes in the ecosystem and creating water-quality problems.”

State and federal environmental officials are working on a remedy, but it won’t be easy. A ban on phosphorus is not likely, because farmers say it is essential to crops. More practical prescriptions may include controls on development and agricultural runoff, and maybe even a ban on phosphorus in lawn fertilizers. Such questions are being discussed and could reach the Statehouse as early as January.

In the meantime, officials are trying to determine how much phosphorus is acceptable in Indiana lakes and streams. * * *

The effects of algae, however, go beyond bad-tasting water.

In Indiana, large amounts of algae and excessive plant growth fueled by fertilizers have affected fish populations in streams and waterways, according to Tedesco, who also is the director of the Center for Earth and Environmental Science at IUPUI.

What was once a gravelly bottom in some portions of the White River, for instance, now have been covered with plants. Where bass might have thrived, carp now live. * * *

“There’s no question that phosphorus in waterways can cause problems,” said Rep. Nancy Dembowski, D-Knox, who chairs a bipartisan lakes management work group charged with monitoring the health of the state’s lakes.

While legislation restricting lawn fertilizer could come up next year, Dembowski said a wider ban could be premature.

“I’m not saying it couldn’t happen,” she said, “but no one is planning that at this time.”

Other Midwestern states, including Wisconsin and Minnesota, have restricted phosphorus in lawn fertilizers.

Low- and zero-level phosphorus lawn fertilizers are available in Indiana stores, said Lance Latham, director of public affairs for Scotts MiracleGro Co. Latham said the company “would not necessarily oppose a ban,” as long as it does not include organic fertilizer — which is animal byproducts — where it is impossible to remove phosphorus, he said.

What the state’s regulatory limit won’t address is runoff from residential lawns and farms — which is called nonpoint sources — that empties into rivers and streams and lakes and is difficult to regulate.

Today the Star has an editorial on the topic, titled "We can find the fertilizer fix." It begins:
From nasty-tasting water in Broad Ripple to vast fish-scarce "dead zones" in the Gulf of Mexico, America's affinity for fertilizer has brought about unintended consequences on a large and depressing scale.

The challenge facing federal and state authorities, and each farmer and lawn owner, is to retain sufficient benefits from the potent prime ingredient, phosphorus, while eliminating the byproduct of intolerable damage to waterways.
Advertisement

As the report from The Star's Jason Thomas on Monday made clear, the task is a formidable one, scientifically, economically and politically.

Precisely measuring the extent of the problem, as well as the extent of each source's contribution to it, remains to be done. Whatever those results turn out to be, it is highly unlikely that states or the federal government will impose a ban on phosphorus from the prime commercial source -- farming -- although scientific advisers to the feds have called for a drastic reduction. Any substantial cut would make for a painful transition for farmers and the economy, albeit a necessary one for the long-term health of our water and land.

More probable are prohibitions or tight restrictions on use of phosphorus-based fertilizers on lawns. Alternatives are widely available and the scope of improvement would be significant.

We might start by taking the decision-making out of the office of state chemist.

Posted by Marcia Oddi on May 25, 2010 11:21 AM
Posted to Environment