national farmers union

The connections between water and agriculture are many. They include the numerous ways farms of all kinds use water, the disastrous effects on crops of too much or too little moisture, water quality risks from pesticides, fertilizers and manure, the impact of irrigation and drainage practices, the farm-level economics of water use and stewardship, and the implications for farmers of water privatization, commercialization or export.

Water affects farming, and farming in turn affects water. The flow in both directions is of the utmost importance to farm families and local communities as well as to the overall economy, to public health, and to the environment. Yet many articles, position papers and other documents dealing with water policy and practice barely mention the agricultural aspects. Unfortunately, the farm press and farm organizations in Canada have also tended to give water issues far less attention than they deserve. Even the NFU and Via Campesina have relatively little in their policies and publications on this vital topic.

We know only too well, however, how quickly farmers get drawn into the picture whenever something goes wrong. The events at Walkerton are only the most blatant example. We need to be prepared for those challenges, and respond with factual information, creative ideas and openness to change.

Water is what makes the Earth a home for living things. Without water, a planet is uninhabitable. It is well known that the human body is made up mostly of water, and the same goes for the food we eat, whether it is of plant or animal origin. No wonder water is so central to everything food producers do! We must refuse to settle for simplistic answers to complex questions, and use our non-farm experience and knowledge to find solutions.

The crops we grow use rainwater and the moisture held in the ground for their nourishment and growth, converting water and water-borne nutrients into plant material through the marvellous process of photosynthesis. Farm animals eat these water-dependent plant materials, and drink water themselves, just as we do. Dairy and other lactating animals require especially large quantities of water as milk's main component. On all farms, water is used for cleaning facilities and equipment, from milking systems to barns to maple syrup set-ups. In arid and semi-arid regions like southern Alberta, irrigation is another major water use, one which is subject to significant losses unless conditions and methods are ideal.

And these are only the most obvious ways water is used in agriculture. Rural household needs, frost protection, and aquaculture are other uses. In addition, natural rural ecosystems - the uncultivated wetlands, woods or grassland that are part of most farms - need water to maintain their health, provide habitat for plants and animals, and perform essential ecological functions.
How much water do farmers use, and how does that compare with use for power generation, industry, and municipal residential services? Nationally, agriculture accounts for only 9% of water withdrawals, compared with a whopping 63% for thermal power generation (coal, gas and nuclear plants) and16 % for manufac-turing.

The prairies account for three quarters of Canada's agricultural water withdrawals. Some interesting comparisons can be drawn from available figures. For instance, a dairy cow needs approximately 160 litres of water a day, about half of what the average Canadian human uses. Of course, that high human use figure involves not only water for drinking and cooking (a very small proportion - 5% - of the per person total) but also bathing (35%), laundry and dishwashing (20%), and flush toilets, which consume an astonishing 40% of an average household's drinking water supply! If Canadians were to switch to more appropriate methods of dealing with human waste, we could reduce our per capita domestic water use to under 200 litres a day, closer to the average consumption of a French citizen - or a Canadian dairy cow!

Weather is a make-or-break proposition for farm people everywhere, and water and weather often mean almost the same thing. The recent drought years on the Prairies, flooding in Manitoba, last year's waterlogged fields in PEI, and Ontario's soggy summer 2000, all provide examples of how too little or too much water can spell disaster for the land, crops and livestock, and for the farmer's pocketbook.

Canadians hear all the time about how we are blessed with the world's largest supply of fresh water, but that supply is finite and not nearly as large or renewable as we have been led to believe. Moreover, like so many things, it is unevenly distributed, both across regions and across seasons. If you are a prairie farmer surveying dry, dusty fields where grain should be, it doesn't help to know that somewhere in New Brunswick your fellow farmers can't even get their hay in because of constant heavy rains.
Of course there isn't much we can do about the weather, but we can and must pay attention to the human-made factors that affect water quantity.

Population growth, urbanization, industry and trade all put pressure on water supplies - pressure which suddenly becomes very visible in a community when a specific conflict arises. For example, back in the summer of 1999, when farmers in Ontario's Grey County heard that the fellow who had been trying to buy their land was the CEO of a water-bottling company, they became alarmed. Drought was already threatening the water-table in this beef-producing area, and the farmers did not like the proposal to take spring water out of county by the tanker truck-load, even if it did have the Ministry of Environment's blessing. To add insult to injury, they learned that the plan was being partly financed by a loan of more than half a million dollars from Farm Credit Corporation. The farmers and other concerned local citizens mounted a campaign to stop the proposed water-taking, and that uphill battle is still going on.

Agriculture itself, of course, can add to the pressure on water supplies, especially when it follows an industrial model. The same economic forces that work against the family farm also work against the conserva-tion and careful stewardship of water. This is particularly evident in large intensive livestock operations, which demand large amounts of water for the animals themselves and for the liquid manure systems which most "mega-barns" use. Similarly, large-scale production of high-value commercial crops can require major irrigation or drainage work, which may dramatically affect the amount and quality of surface or groundwater in an area. Such effects may appear to be temporary, but when large volumes of water are withdrawn over time, entire aquifers may be at risk. The best-known example is probably the depletion of the Oglala Aquifer in the United States, but we have our own in Canada, notably the Estevan Valley Aquifer in Saskat-chewan, where overly optimistic estimates of sustainable yields in the 1960s and '70s led to major drawdowns and depletion which will now take many years to recharge.

This illustrates a point made by Kathy Cooper, researcher with the Canadian Environmental Law Association - that there really exists little knowledge of the groundwater which underlies the land we farm, despite an increasing number of hydrogeological studies. For the most part, even the experts don't know which aquifers are being regularly replenished from rainfall and seepage, and which ones consist of ancient glacial waters from another time. Even where that is known, information on exactly where the water comes from, what path it takes and how quickly it will recharge tends to be no more than educated guesswork. Public attitudes are a major element in the whole water supply equation.

The majority of Canadians, who have never - yet - experienced first hand the effects of severe drought or flooding, find it hard to understand that our vast country, dotted with lakes and rivers and blessed with an entire season of snow, could have problems with water quantity. Even when water shortages are felt, governments, industries and farmers have tended to seek out or develop more supply, often at great financial and environmental cost, rather than find ways to restrict demand.

They - or is it we? - still continue to take for granted an unlimited supply of water, available when needed and capable of meeting whatever level of new demand may be created. But that is an illusion. The public and the farming community must start seeing water as finite and precious, and treating it as such, or the threats to our water supply will continue to mount.
The answer, however, is not to make water into a commodity. Proposals by some environmentalists to fix prices for water and charge all users for the amount they consume are well-meaning but misguided. While profit-making commercial ventures should certainly be required to pay for water use, two important distinctions need to be made.

First, as a public trust, water cannot have a price. Any money involved must take the form of a fee paid to the public purse, not a price paid to a private owner. Secondly, every household must have access, free of charge, to enough water for drinking and sanitation, and small- and medium-sized farms must similarly have free access to the basic supply they need for their crops and animals. Only in this way can water policy respect both environmental and societal needs.

a) Reducing demand:

-drought-resistant varieties and crop rotations

-tillage and cultivation systems that conserve soil moisture

-more efficient irrigation systems (drip or trickle rather than sprinkler)

-more efficient livestock watering systems (eg. bowls and

-hopper waterers rather than nipple waterers for hogs)

household water conservation measures (eg. low-flush, compost or dry toilets,
water-saving shower heads, general awareness of water use and wastage)

-scraping or sweeping floors before washing, using high-pressure nozzles,
water-saving sinks, first-rinse water from milk lines to water calves, equipment rinse water to wash floors, etc.

b) Increasing supply:

-ponds, sloughs and dug-outs

summerfallow

-re-use of wastewaters

-collection of rainwater for garden use

Aquifer --an underground layer or zone of rock or soil which is porous and extensive enough to store groundwater and readily yield a supply to wells or springs (see Diagram).

Consumptive uses -- Water uses which remove water from a watershed without returning it in usable form (eg. water-bottling, high-evaporation irrigation systems, liquid manure systems, etc.) Many uses are partly consumptive and partly non-consumptive; eg.household use, watering livestock.)

Groundwater --Sub-surface water, or water stored in the pores or cracks of the ground below the water table.

Hydrologic Cycle (or water cycle) -- The natural circulation, movement and storage of water in the atmosphere, ground and water bodies, through precipitation, transpiration, evaporation, condensation, runoff, etc.

Infiltration --Movement of surface water into soil or rock through cracks and pores.

Leaching -- Removal of materials in solution by water percolating through the soil profile.

Non-Point-Source Contamination --Contamination of water from a large area, usually when pollutants run off the land surface or leach through the soil profile.

Recharge Area --The geographic area where an aquifer or water body is replenished by water seeping into the ground.

Runoff -- Water from precipitation which flows over or through the ground into water bodies when soil is saturated.

Surface water --The water in streams, ponds, lakes and rivers.

Water table --The upper surface of an aquifer, the level below which the ground is permanently saturated with water.

Since the tragedy at Walkerton, by far the most talked-about and emotionally charged aspect of the whole water debate is water quality and the associated risks to human health. When the source of that town's deadly E coli contamination was traced to a cattle farm, livestock farming instantly became the prime target for people seeking something or someone to blame. But the issue is not that simple. Yes, livestock manure can be a pollutant as well as a "nutrient", but even if all farm animals were to sud-denly disappear from the Canadian countryside, we would still be left with the looming potential for many more Walkertons.

For one thing, many non-livestock elements of modern agricul-ture contribute to water pollution, among them pesticides, chemical fertilizers, sewage sludge applications, and certain irrigation, drainage, and tillage and cropping practices. Some of these problems can be as serious as E coli contamination, and they must not be neglected in the current flurry of attention to livestock manure.

When we look beyond the agricultural sector, the picture is even more alarming. Leaking septic tanks, municipal sewage by-passes and stormwater overflows are sources of bacterial and chemical contaminants every bit as dangerous to human and environmental health as manure-borne pathogens. Huge quantities of highly toxic pollutants are spewed into the environment by pulp mills, mines and smelters, nuclear plants, oil and gas, and a multitude of other industries. Still other poisons enter surface and groundwater from vehicles, urban "development", and garbage dumps (termed "sanitary landfills" to disguise the ugly reality.)

This non-agricultural contamination is constant, widespread and extremely serious, yet much of it is never monitored or analyzed. Even where applicable regulations exist, they are often not enforced. In fact, much of the systematic pollution of Canada's water is authorized and actively promoted by government authorities.

In addressing the issue of deteriorating water quality, the first step is to properly define the problems. In doing so, it is vital that we keep an accurate sense of proportion; otherwise any proposed solutions will be partial at best. As the NFU said in its recent brief to the Ontario government on proposed standards for agricultural operations:
"We know that non-agricultural problems are major sources of water contamination. But as farmers we must do our part by working on the aspects of the problem that are in our control... While we have chosen to focus in this presentation mainly on livestock operations and manure management, we urge you to give your attention just as diligently to those other equally crucial issues."

Farm families are, of course, among the first affected by poor rural water quality, in terms of both their own health and that of their land, crops and animals. Moreover, the long-term economic and physical survival of family farms and farming communities depends on the sustainability of their farming practices, including their ability to maintain the quality of their water. By contrast, large corporate agricultural operations are only in business for a quick buck; if their industrial methods wreak ecological havoc in one place, they can pick up and go pollute elsewhere. Regarding water, it is clearly once again the small- and medium-sized family farms which hold the key to environmentally sane policies and practices regarding water.

Within this broader context, what are the farm-related issues? They have to do with potential sources of contamination, and with the ways contaminants move from their source into surface or groundwater. Those risky materials can be nutrients, pesticides, disease agents like bacteria, or sediments, which may have harmful chemicals such as heavy metals or endocrine-disruptors attached. They enter the water mainly through surface runoff, leaching, and drainage systems; some contaminants are deposited in soil or waterways through rain or snow.

For safeguarding water quality, then, the first aspect to look at is how to reduce or eliminate sources of pollution on the farm. This involves a wide range of approaches to both agricultural inputs and waste, and while much good information exists, there is also an ongoing need for more research and farm-level innovation. On the input side, minimizing the use and mobility of chemical fertilizers and pesticides will benefit water quality. Organic farming does not use these pollutants at all, and more and more farmers are choosing to make that transition. Others use an integrated pest management (IPM) approach, applying chemical pesticides only to complement other methods and only when there is a threat of real economic injury. The proper timing and method of application of chemical inputs are also very important.

Livestock manure is abundant, complex and extremely controversial, both as an agricultural input and as a waste. Good quality manure, properly treated and applied, can nourish the land and improve soil tilth and structure. On the other hand, like other fertilizers, an excess of it can do serious ecological harm to both soil and water. In the worst cases, as recent incidents have shown, manure can be a deadly source of contamination, changing water itself into a poison.

The potential toxicity of manure to soil, water and people varies greatly depending on its original composition and how it is handled. For instance, manure from large factory-style hog barns is more likely to contain antibiotic-resistant bacteria or potentially toxic residues of chemicals or medications, since intensive operations depend heavily on such inputs. Similarly, liquid manure slurry, the commonest form of manure from mega-barns, is mobile in and on the ground, and is therefore more likely to contaminate water supplies than properly treated solid manure.

Another waste material which is touted as a nutrient is sewage sludge, or "biosolids", from municipal water treatment plants. Many municipalities or their agents now contract with farmers to spread this stuff on their land. In Ontario alone, approximately one third of the 300,000 dry-tonnes of sewage sludge generated each year are applied to farmland, and this is expected to increase. There are serious concerns about various contaminants in sewage sludge getting into water; anyone who thinks about what people put down their toilets, from paint to pesticides, will share that concern. Even if only human waste were involved, there would be cause for alarm; in fact, it has been reported that sewage sludge from Walkerton is applied to farmland.

Researcher Maureen Reilly points out that recent stricter standards for sewage treatment plants and industries such as pulp and paper have meant that more contaminants are now extracted before wastewater is returned to lakes and rivers. Those contaminants are captured and concentrated in municipal or papermill sludge, which is then offered to farmers as a "soil conditioner" or "organic amend-ment" for their fields. Although some "guidelines" exist for the composition and application of sludge, they are typically inade-quate and poorly enforced.⁷

Farm wastes such as silo seepage, washwater from barns or milkhouses, used oil, pesticide containers, and dead animals can also put water at risk. As costs rise and farm incomes drop, farmers have fewer affordable options for proper disposal. Dead stock, for example, can become a serious problem in regions where financially strapped deadstock companies have to start charging farmers pick-up fees.

The other main aspect of water pollution prevention deals with how contaminants get into water bodies or groundwater. Awareness of potential pollutant pathways suggests many possible ways to block those pathways and preserve water quality. Of prime importance are land management methods to maintain soil structure and reduce runoff; these include appropriate crop rotations, conservation tillage, cover crops, and timing of field work to avoid compaction by machinery. Buffer zones and shelter belts help reduce erosion and protect waterways, and proper maintenance of drainage systems can minimize the role they can play in transporting contaminants. Keeping livestock out of streams and ponds prevents direct contamination from manure and sediments, and protects shoreline vegetation buffers and wildlife habitat.

Water is essential to all life. Water has become a critical issue in Canada and around the world. As the availability of abundant quantities of clean water becomes rarer, the health of aquatic and terrestrial ecosystems and the species that inhabit them -- including humans -- is threatened. The appearance of water scarcity has caused some to conclude that water is best treated as a commodity, to be bought, sold and traded in accordance with market principles. The idea of water as part of the global commons and as an essential part of our natural heritage is under threat.

Also threatened are the collective means by which generations of Canadians have sought to provide water and sanitation services to people living in towns and cities.

Canadians are at an historic crossroads in the way we think about and manage water. This declaration is an expression of our resolve that all Canadians should be involved in making these decisions and that the environment and the public interest should not be sacrificed to market principles and private gain.