Bowing to the pressure of local small businesses dependent on public water for their livelihoods, the Belmont City Council water committee has put forth a motion to ease water restrictions in the area.
Residents would be able to hand water, drip irrigate trees, shrubs, and personal gardens. If approved, the watering could be done during the entire day on those three days. “I don’t mind the hand held watering,” said Councilman Charlie Flowers”.
It seems that the “squeaky” (re: “leaky”) wheel gets the grease. If City Council passes the recommendation, residents still will not be able to water their lawns.
Other communities throughout the state are still working on further restrictions and closely tracking water use, Belmont gets a bit a rain and Poof! – no more drought — in some eyes.
We admit there has been some improvement in the drought, but the area is still in what is considered exceptional drought conditions. Typically late February and the month of March are “catch up” months in regards to rain. Not this spring – so far.
A special meeting next Monday evening (6:30 PM) will have this discussion and vote. Interested people should attend this meeting and see how council members who have landscapers maintain their personal yards vote on this issue.
More information links: System Status for Belmont
Older table dates
Sure doesn’t look like water restrictions have affected Belmont’s use of water. Going back to an earlier article where the Belmont Front Porch reported on the growing practice of new wells being dug throughout the county, the County Health Department repudiated the charge that new wells were an issue with groundwater.
With this information, it seems that local “businesses” would not be affected — according to the County health department — just dig a well.
Good for business, keeps the businesses off the backs of elected “leaders”, and keeps the progeny of local councilmembers with their jobs.
It’s all good.
With Stage 3 water restrictions in place, Belmont must just be ignoring the severity of the drought.
In October, Governor Easley called on the municipalities throughout the state to cut water useage by 50%. According to the NC Drought Monitor, Belmont just isn’t meeting that goal.
Belmont’s average daily useage as of August 2007 was 2.4 million gallons per day.
12/10 12/3 11/26 11/19 11/12 11/5 10/29 10/22
So, what’s up with that?
It is not as if the state hadn’t given communities guidelines or unreasonable expectations. Back in 2002, during the last drought, the State passed HB 1215. Section 5 of House Bill 1215 required the Department of Environment and Natural Resources to evaluate water conservation measures being implemented in North Carolina and to identify incentive programs and other voluntary programs that can help foster water conservation, water reuse, and water use efficiency.
At the last city council meeting, City Manager Barry Webb, spoke about the possible actions to “encourage” further water conservation, including a “temporary” water rate increase.
We all know that several businesses will be heavily impacted, and that those on “fixed incomes” will want exemptions right off the bat, if council seriously considers this added taxation.
(Charlotte Observer Photo)
Imagine the arrogance of people who think that well water doesn’t affect a community’s ability to conserve its resources.
The city, towns, villages, and county tells you about Stage Restrictions — currently Stage 3, Mandatory — and what do people do? Contract with well-diggers to give themselves a “free source” of water. That recent article (October 11) in the Charlotte Observer, led to a series of letters to the editor that were critical of the practice, give us hope here on the Belmont Front Porch, that not all people are so ignorant or crazy, or both.
Here in Belmont, we have more than one neighborhood that purports to be using well-water for irrigation. This practice must stop !
There have been reports of frantic neighbors here in Gaston County calling insurance companies, well-drilling companies, and county officials about their “dried up wells”. Alledgedly, Gaston County staffers have told property owners that their only resolution is to “drill deeper”.
The Observer published a graphic that shows the impact of wells on the aquifer.
We have also published a portion of an article by the US Geological Survey about the relationship of Ground Water and Surface Water. The full article can be retrieved from this link: USGS
The Effect of Ground-Water Withdrawals on Surface Water
Withdrawing water from shallow aquifers that are directly connected to surface-water bodies can have a significant effect on the movement of water between these two water bodies. The effects of pumping a single well or a small group of wells on the hydrologic regime are local in scale. However, the effects of many wells withdrawing water from an aquifer over large areas may be regional in scale.
Withdrawing water from shallow aquifers for public and domestic water supply, irrigation, and industrial uses is widespread. Withdrawing water from shallow aquifers near surface-water bodies can diminish the available surface-water supply by capturing some of the ground-water flow that otherwise would have discharged to surface water or by inducing flow from surface water into the surrounding aquifer system. An analysis of the sources of water to a pumping well in a shallow aquifer that discharges to a stream is provided here to gain insight into how a pumping well can change the quantity and direction of flow between the shallow aquifer and the stream. Furthermore, changes in the direction of flow between the two water bodies can affect transport of contaminants associated with the moving water. Although a stream is used in the example, the results apply to all surface-water bodies, including lakes and wetlands.
A ground-water system under predevelopment conditions is in a state of dynamic equilibrium-for example, recharge at the water table is equal to ground-water discharge to a stream (Figure C-1A). Assume a well is installed and is pumped continually at a rate, Q1. After a new state of dynamic equilibrium is achieved, inflow to the ground-water system from recharge will equal outflow to the stream plus the withdrawal from the well. In this new equilibrium, some of the ground water that would have discharged to the stream is intercepted by the well, and a ground-water divide, which is a line separating directions of flow, is established locally between the well and the stream (Figure C-1B). If the well is pumped at a higher rate, Q2, at a later time a new equilibrium is reached. Under this condition, the ground-water divide between the well and the stream is no longer present and withdrawals from the well induce movement of water from the stream into the aquifer (Figure C-1C). Thus, pumpage reverses the hydrologic condition of the stream in this reach from a ground-water discharge feature to a ground-water recharge feature.
In the hydrologic system depicted in Figures C-1A and C-1B, the quality of the stream water generally will have little effect on the quality of the shallow ground water. However, in the case of the well pumping at the higher rate, Q2 (Figure C-1C), the quality of the stream water, which locally recharges the shallow aquifer, can affect the quality of ground water between the well and the stream as well as the quality of the ground water withdrawn from the well.
This hypothetical withdrawal of water from a shallow aquifer that discharges to a nearby surface-water body is a simplified but compelling illustration of the concept that ground water and surface water are one resource. In the long term, the quantity of ground water withdrawn is approximately equal to the reduction in streamflow that is potentially available to downstream users.