Thanks to the Eastern Shore Post and Linda Cicoira for reporting on the issues surrounding the future of the Eastern Shore of Virginia’s groundwater reserves and the ongoing debate regarding the expansion of the poultry industry in Accomack County.
I appreciate the opportunity to clarify a point that was made in Ms.Cicoira’s April 26, 2019 article in The Post [DEQ Groundwater Public Meeting Heats Up to a Boil]. Specifically,as correctly reported, in a letter to the Chairman of the A-NPDC’s Groundwater Committee this writer warned that blind faith in a limited and unilateral “scientific” opinion on the sustainability of our aquifer was dangerous and cited a number of instances where reliance on narrow testimony from “experts” hired by industry to offer “opinions” on various environmental issues or threats had turned out to be disastrous.
This was not meant as a condemnation of the vast majority of credentialed, dedicated, and esteemed scientists and researchers whose work has served to underwrite a policy that saved us all from unimaginable degradation of our life and environment on this planet. Indeed, examples of legislation that were based on credible science and testimony are the Clean Air and Clean Water Acts of 1970 groundbreaking legislation which has spared tens of millions of lives since passage.
Also, climate scientists in the 1970’s and ’80s accurately predicted that we would experience extreme weather events and sea level rise if we did not temper our use of carbon-based fuels. Additionally, scientists and doctors
in the medical field have saved billions of lives by developing treatments and preventatives that have or are eradicating disease and afflictions that would have ravaged global survival without their work and discoveries.
We join scientists in promoting the use of the Precautionary Principle, an approach which states that when the totality of risks from a proposed action are unknown, you err on the side of public health and the environment. This approach seems to be lacking in the current debate. It’s not complicated “rocket science” but can be summed up as simply “common sense”.
Paul Plante says
As a “scientist” who not only has an interest in this subject, but who also has a wealth of experience as a public health engineer and licensed professional engineer who acts as an advocate for the public on groundwater issues, having been certified as an expert witness in that field in the state of New York, with the narrow testimony from “experts” hired by industry to offer “opinions” on various environmental issues, I would like to step up to the plate in here to make two points, to wit:
POINT I: Yes, Mr. Dufty, you are very right to be concerned about narrow testimony from “experts” hired by industry to offer “opinions” on various environmental issues, and you are very right in expressing those concerns to the Chairman of the A-NPDC’s Groundwater Committee, who seems to be not very well informed on the subject of groundwater on the Eastern Shore of Virginia from comments I have seen that have been attributed to him, which make him seem highly unqualified to be holding the position he does, and you are very right in bringing those concerns to the attention of the public at large, who need to realize that like lawyers, engineers, hydrogeologists and other scientists oftentimes sell their services as rented pencils to those who can pay the freight.
“Um, what position would you like me to take for you?”
I will say from experience that Mr. Dufty has those valid concerns because before he came to Virginia, he was facing down those same scientists who sell their services as rented pencils in hearing after hearing in the state of New York where Mr. Dufty was a key figure in helping citizens debunk the false claims of those same scientists, as was I.
There is big money as a “professional” in telling outright lies to citizens on behalf of business or industry and there is absolutely no down side, whatsoever, firstly, because most citizens cannot on their own debunk the lies, and those like Mr. Dufty who can are ignored, and secondly, there are no penalties for lying.
The harm is much more likely to come to he or she who dares to expose the lies, as opposed to those who tell the lies, because they are already on the side of power.
I will say that while Mr. Dufty was in New York, there were many who wanted to see him get “clipped” for exposing the lies of lying scientists, but they were too gutless to try themselves.
POINT II: Scientists are merely people.
Yes, they have specific knowledge, but it is how they put that knowledge to use that defines them.
All scientists are supposed to be skeptics, which is what peer review is all about, so there is absolutely nothing whatsoever wrong with questioning a scientist’s judgments and opinions, especially when those opinions are being rendered on behalf of a corporate client.
The Hudson River in New York state is a hazardous waste site precisely because of a scientist who cavalierly applied the wrong model in determining how much PCB-contaminated sludge would be behind a dam on the Hudson River which was to be removed.
He was off by several magnitudes, and the rest is now history, so yes, scientists acting as yes men for corporate America most certainly can and do cause serious environmental harm and degradation, and kudos to Mr. Dufty for having the grits and guts to stand up and question what does not seem to make sense, even though he is only given a mere three minutes in which to make his points.
And with that said, what I would like to do in the spirit, of this discussion is to put forth a simple TRUE-FALSE quiz for the Chairman of the A-NPDC’s Groundwater Committee, which answers will go towards establishing some common ground here, as well as hopefully curing some of the Chairman’s apparent confusion, to wit:
ANSWER EACH STATEMENT EITHER TRUE OR FALSE (the at-home viewing audience is welcome to join in):
A. The Eastern Shore of Virginia depends entirely on ground water for potable water supplies, as well as most non-potable supplies such as irrigation water.
B. Because the peninsula is surrounded by large bodies of saltwater, ground water becomes brackish at relatively shallow depths (< 350 feet) in most areas, and the total available ground water supply is more limited than on the mainland.
C. Threats to ground water on the Eastern Shore may be placed into three general categories:
(1) saltwater intrusion;
(2) hydraulic head depression; and
(3) contamination from surface sources.
D. Intrusion of saltwater into fresh ground water aquifers can be caused by wells that are screened too close to the freshwater/saltwater interface, are too close to the shore, and/or pump at an excessive rate.
E. Depression of the hydraulic head occurs around every pumping well, but if pumping rates are too high or if wells are too close to each other, water levels in some wells can drop so low that well yields are reduced.
F. In extreme cases, the head can fall so low that the aquifer is partially dewatered, which in turn can cause consolidation and a permanent loss of transmissivity (which will also reduce well yield)
G. The Columbia and Yorktown-Eastover aquifers are high-yielding aquifers which the service area population relies on for more than 50% of its drinking water needs.
H. There exists no viable economical alternative drinking water source or combination of sources to supply the designated service area.
I. While the quality of the Columbia and Yorktown-Eastover aquifer's ground water is considered to be good, it is highly vulnerable to contamination due to its geological characteristics and possible land-use activities.
J. The designated area the Chairman has responsibility for is a multiaquifer system with a surficial aquifer (Columbia aquifer) consisting of shallow sand and gravel deposits and a deeper confined aquifer (YorktownEastover aquifer) which is recharged by water from the surficial aquifer.
K. The shallow nature of the surficial aquifer allows contaminants to be rapidly introduced into the ground water with minimal assimilation.
L. It is this high vulnerability to contamination, especially on the central "spine" of the
peninsula, coupled with the aquifer's value as the principal source of drinking water for the residents served, that could pose a significant public health hazard.
Paul Plante says
So as I understand the situation, and please, Mr. Chairman of the A-NPDC’s Groundwater Committee, feel free to step in here and correct me if I am wrong, there are three outstanding issues of contention between the concerned citizens, who being citizens, have not only every right to be concerned, but further have the right to demand accountability from their so-called and supposed “public servants” (what a mis-used term that has become), and they are as follows:
1) the more the aquifer is pumped, the greater the recharge will be;
2) No matter how much water you pump from the aquifer in Accomack County, it will never affect the aquifer in Northampton County; and
3) there is nothing to worry about from the unprecedented build out of the poultry industry in Accomack County, as “monitoring wells” are staying at static water levels,
end quotes
Now, speaking as a “scientist,” I would say that to determine the “truth” (correctness) of any of those claims, which I understand come from the mouth of the Honorable and Most Esteemed Chairman of the A-NPDC’s Groundwater Committee, and again sir, feel free to step in here and correct me if I am wrong, it is necessary to first understand the “system” under consideration, in this case, a peninsula on the east coast of the United States of America that has its own unique history of formation, which history in its turn defines and controls the presence or absence of water beneath the ground surface, and how it flows.
To do that, a public health engineer like myself first conducts an extensive literature search to gather in all the known scientific data in existence, so as to be able to understand the system we are working with.
In this case, we are lucky because there have been a substantial number of local and regional studies on the geologic and hydrologic characteristics of the sediments on the Eastern Shore of Virginia and adjacent areas of Maryland, and many of these studies have dealt principally with
geologic descriptions of the formational units.
For those not familiar with the term “formational units,” a formation or geological formation is the fundamental unit of lithostratigraphy, which is really where an engineer studying groundwater begins.
A formation consists of a certain amount of rock strata that have a comparable lithology, facies or other similar properties.
In this case, and this is critical information with regard to those issues above, the geology of the
Eastern Shore consists of unconsolidated deposits of interbedded clay, silt, sand, and gravel, with variable amounts of shell material.
These deposits thicken and slope eastward, and form a system of layered aquifers and confining units.
Now, focus closely on all of those those words in that last sentence, because if someone is modeling the groundwater system in question, there is “ground zero.”
And a key term in that sentence of “confining units.”
According to the USGS, a “confining unit” is a relatively low permeability geologic unit that impedes the vertical movement of water, and thus, has a direct effect on recharge, which is one of the key issues of contention here, that alleged claim by Honorable and Most Esteemed Chairman of the A-NPDC’s Groundwater Committee that the more the aquifer is pumped, the greater the rccharge rate will be, to which I am forced to have to reply, “Oh, really, what a novel concept!”
And actually, if that is the claim being made, and please, Honorable and Most Esteemed Chairman of the A-NPDC’s Groundwater Committee, feel free to jump in here with both feet and correct me if I don’t have that right, it is a patently absurd claim which should serve to make the one making the absurd claim unqualified to fill a position of public trust on the East Shore of Virginia.
Getting back to the physical reality we are dealing with here, the total sediment thickness ranges from approximately 2,000 feet in the western areas to as much as 7,000 feet to the east.
These sediments generally overlie a bedrock basement that also dips northeastward.
The hydrostratigraphic layers of the Eastern Shore are divided into the unconfined Columbia aquifer (water table aquifer), and a series of confined aquifers and intervening semi-confining units.
The low permeability confining units restrict downward groundwater movement.
Now, stop right there, people, with that last sentence, which if true, and I have no reason to doubt it, given the body of evidence I have reviewed, we can begin to see just how bizarre and absurd the claim is that the more the aquifer is pumped, the greater will be the rate of recharge.
In a word, and yes, this is a technical term used by public health engineers, that is pure horse****.
Think about it, people, if there low permeability confining units restricting downward groundwater movement, then how exactly is all this supposed recharge getting down there faster and faster as the aquifer is pumped more and more?
Is that recharge taking an elevator down, or has it found a secret passage perhaps?
Or is there some type of VOODOO at play here?
Getting back to the physical system under consideration, the confined aquifers, in order of increasing depth, are: Yorktown-Eastover (includes upper, middle, and lower Yorktown aquifers), St. Marys Choptank aquifer, Brightseat aquifer, and upper, middle, and lower Potomac aquifers.
Fresh groundwater generally occurs only in the upper 300 feet of sediments and at shallower depths along the coastlines of the Eastern Shore and is limited to the Columbia and Yorktown aquifers where the freshwater forms a perched lens above the deeper salt-water, which aquifers have been designated by the EPA as the sole source aquifers for the Eastern Shore, excluding Tangier and Chincoteague Islands.
According to the USGS, perched ground water is unconfined ground water separated from an underlying main body of ground water by an unsaturated zone.
And there I will rest for the moment to let all of that sink in.
Paul Plante says
And for those of you responsible concerned citizens who are pondering the TRUE/FALSE QUIZ above and specifically statement J. “The designated area the Chairman has responsibility for is a multiaquifer system with a surficial aquifer (Columbia aquifer) consisting of shallow sand and gravel deposits and a deeper confined aquifer (YorktownEastover aquifer) which is recharged by water from the surficial aquifer,” I think at this point in time a review of some regulatory history with regard to that statement is in order so that you can form an independent opinion as to the truth or falsity of that claim, which really is the basis of citizenship in a true democracy, n’est-ce pas?
So by way of review, and hopefully, this is taught in high school civics down here, effective November 1, 1976, the Eastern Shore of Virginia was declared a “Critical Ground Water Area,” subject to regulation under the Ground Water Management act.
My comments in here as an associate level public health engineer (disabled retired) therefore are with respect to any rights to protection of law and due process of law and a right to honest services when it comes to protection of public health of the American people living on the Eastern Shore of the Commonwealth of Virginia associated with that declaration of the Eastern Shore as a “Critical Ground Water Area,” subject to regulation under the Ground Water Management act and the statement in the TRUE/FALSE QUIZ above as follows: L. It is this high vulnerability to contamination, especially on the central “spine” of the peninsula, coupled with the aquifer’s value as the principal source of drinking water for the residents served, that could pose a significant public health hazard.
That goes to the necessary issue of standing for citizens to appear in an administrative hearing, which in essence we are having a citizen’s version of in here -a fact-finding hearing, which takes us back to the regulatory history as follows:
On June 17, 2013, the State Water Control Board adopted amendments that included the Eastern
Shore in the “Eastern Virginia Groundwater Management Area”.
This action consolidates all localities in the Coastal Plain of Virginia under one Groundwater Management Area.
The declaration of the Eastern Shore as part of the Groundwater Management Area is based on
the following findings:
* Groundwater level declines have been observed in two sections of Accomack County;
* Interference between wells has been observed in the same two sections of Accomack County;
* Some evidence of localized groundwater contamination has been observed in the water table
aquifer in Accomack County but not in the confined aquifers;
* Even though groundwater supplies in Accomack County are not overdrawn and are not expected
to be in the near future, it should be recognized that they may overdraw in some areas in the future if water withdrawals are not distributed throughout the region.
Further, saltwater intrusion has not been observed to date but may occur in the future if heavy groundwater withdrawals are concentrated in any one area.
This designation allows the Virginia Department of Environmental Quality to regulate through permits groundwater withdrawals that equal or exceed 300,000 gallons in a single month in order to “conserve, protect and beneficially utilize the groundwater resource and to ensure the public welfare, safety and health”.
end quotes
And with that regulatory statement, to “conserve, protect and beneficially utilize the groundwater resource and to ensure the public welfare, safety and health,” in the record, let me stop right there for that to sink in and be digested because that is what anybody petitioning the “commonwealth” for redress of grievance must base their grievance on to have standing- by his actions, is the Honorable and Most Esteemed Chairman of the A-NPDC’s Groundwater Committee ensuring the public welfare, safety and health?
If you feel he is not, and here is where Mr. Dufty’s considerable expertise comes to the fore, then you have to be able to articulate it in an factual, non-emotional manner, which is why I am taking the time, very much thanks to the Cape Charles Mirror to present this background from the perspective of a professional public health engineer.
It is not enough to say you don’t think he is doing a good job.
You need to demonstrate that his judgment is flawed, and how.
Hence these primers.
Paul Plante says
So, let’s go back and do some review here, people, because what you are seeing and what you are experiencing is a collision between “science” on the one hand, which is what caused the State Water Control Board to adopt amendments six (6) years ago on June 17, 2013 that included the Eastern Shore in the “Eastern Virginia Groundwater Management Area,” and politics and policy on the other, with that policy being that any and all regulations intended to protect the public’s health which impact on the profits of a business or corporation are to be disregarded, which in this case has resulted in these three issues of contention between the citizens and the water board as follows:
1) the more the aquifer is pumped, the greater the recharge will be;
2) No matter how much water you pump from the aquifer in Accomack County, it will never affect the aquifer in Northampton County; and
3) there is nothing to worry about from the unprecedented build out of the poultry industry in Accomack County, as “monitoring wells” are staying at static water levels.
end quotes
Now, think about it, people – if all of that is true, then why is there a need for the Eastern Shore to be included in the “Eastern Virginia Groundwater Management Area” where the declaration of the Eastern Shore as part of the Groundwater Management Area is based in part on the following findings:
* Groundwater level declines have been observed in two sections of Accomack County;
* Interference between wells has been observed in the same two sections of Accomack County.
end quotes
If it is in fact true as the experts on the now-constituted water board say, and they are the experts put in place by the political authorities to conserve, protect and beneficially utilize the groundwater resource and to ensure the public welfare, safety and health, that the more the aquifer is pumped, the greater the recharge will be, then it would have to be true, would it not, that with all this additional pumping since 2013, the groundwater level declines observed in 2013 have since been reversed by all of this greater recharge, so that now, the aquifer is actually filling, to the point of where Accomack County will soon have enough excess groundwater that they will be able to not only sustain a bunch more chicken houses with, but will actually be able to become a major-league exporter of water to people living in deserts around the world who don’t have enough of their own, which is going to give a real serious goose to the GDP of Accomack County, so that Accomack County will be able to share all that additional wealth with the people who reside in Accomack County in the form of dividend checks like people in Alaska get from the oil revenues.
Which means that you can then disband the water board and peace will once again reign in the land.
Paul Plante says
And with regard to Mr. Dufty’s proven expertise as a citizen advocate in matters concerning groundwater versus that of these political appointees on the water board, I would like to quote as follows from a Decision, June 26, 1998, STATE OF NEW YORK : DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL CONSERVATION, 50 Wolf Road, Albany, New York 12233-1010, In the Matter of the Application of LANE CONSTRUCTION COMPANY for a Mined Land Use Permit, and other required permits for operation of a Hard Rock Mine in the Town of Nassau, Rensselaer County, New York, DEC Project No. 4-3830-00046/00001-0
DECISION
June 26, 1998
DECISION OF THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER
Rensselaer County Environmental Management Council
The RCEMC contends the project, as proposed by the Applicant, will result in unacceptable adverse environmental impacts to the Kinderhook Creek, one of the most significant and valuable natural resources in Rensselaer County.
Further, the Applicant has done an inadequate job of determining the extent and character of the “Old Town Dump” wastes deposited on its property, such that, in the scheme of the Applicant’s proposed sedimentation and surface water control facilities, this inactive landfill poses a potential threat to the water quality of the Kinderhook Creek and to down gradient residential well users.
Additionally, the Applicant has inadequately and incorrectly characterized the interconnection between the groundwater “mound” contained within the rock structure of Snake Mountain and the proximate residential wells.
The RCEMC maintains there will be an unacceptable adverse impact on the groundwater resources available to such wells once the Applicant begins removing the mountain and further that the proposed “well arbitration agreement” does not sufficiently protect the nearby homeowners who rely on these groundwater resources for their well supplies.
Lastly, the RCEMC maintains that the present zoning regulations in the Town of Nassau do not authorize a mining project on the proposed site of the scope and duration proposed by the Applicant.
The RCEMC urges that the permits sought by the Applicant be denied.
end quotes
The “RCEMC” was one man – Mr. Dufty.
Based on his efforts as a citizen advocate, the corrupt New York State Department of Environmental Conservation, more properly known locally as the Destroyer of Communities and the Environment, was forced to hold what is known as a legislative hearing, similar to a court proceeding, where standing must first be established, and as a result of this hearing and Mr. Dufty’s efforts, the DEC was forced to have to pull back a permit that it had already issued, which is unprecedented in this corrupt third-world ****hole of New York.
So when it comes to protecting the groundwater in Northampton County, Va., assuming anyone even gives a damn, who would you rather have on your side?
Mr. Dufty?
Or the water board crowd?