The case: land protection will preserve and protect water quality

Extensive watershed science and practical experience demonstrates that land protection leads directly to water quality protection. In early 2009, recognizing the explicit connection between the land resources of the Savannah Basin and their impact on raw water supplies, the South Lowcountry (SOLO) Task Force consisting of state and federal government agencies, NGO’s, business and private interests came together around the issue. They agreed the largely rural character of the Savannah basin, a great example of green infrastructure, should be preserved. The Lower Savannah sub-basin is at a critical juncture. Forest cover is still sufficient to assure raw water quality and development pressures have not yet risen to the point that land protection at a scale sufficient to protect water quality is cost-prohibitive. Given those conditions, the SOLO Task Force agreed to make the protection of the river corridor and watershed a top priority.

The cleansing effect of natural land is well established in science, but the act of determining just which lands are most important in a given basin is a local analysis that requires local data. To that end, the Task Force asked The Nature Conservancy to form an initial Steering Committee to discuss approaches to land prioritization for water quality. An analysis area representing about 2.79 Million acres was agreed upon, capturing the basin downstream of Thurmond Dam.

As a result of this prioritization, it was determined that about 210.000 of the total 1.17 Million acres are most critical in terms of their contribution to water quality, with the balance of about 960,000 acres ranked important but not most critical. This prioritization is useful in terms of estimating and then raising precious investment dollars for the preservation of land and forest cover. The Steering Committee agreed that a reasonable cost to preserve the high priority lands may approximate $135 Million (a blend of land and conservation easement purchases by both government and land trusts) while the remaining 960,000 acres could be kept in forest cover using forest certification, term easements, land stewardship and other less costly methods at an estimated cost of $15 Million. In total, the Steering Committee has estimated a $150 Million need to preserve and maintain forest cover goals.

To raise $150 Million over an extended period is a considerable challenge. The most likely investors are those who now benefit or will benefit directly from the results of the investment, specifically, the present and future water users and dischargers to the river. Knowing the burden of maintenance of water quality in the river should not be borne exclusively by those groups, however, the Steering Committee agreed a fair allocation of the $150 Million need should come half ($75 Million) from the users with the balance from other sources such as state and federal funding programs, local green initiatives, philanthropic organizations and others.

To raise $75 Million from the river water users, the Steering Committee commissioned a study to identify user volumes based on current intake and discharge. Both SCDHEC and GAEPD provided data for that purpose, out of which has been identified a list of potential funding sources classified as small, medium and large users and further by municipal, government or industry. It is apparent that any raise of $75 Million must be over an extended period of time and spread over as much of the user base as possible, so that no one user is disproportionately carrying an unreasonable financial burden. Presuming an equitable allocation of the $75 Million need and an extended raise period of 20 plus years, it is anticipated municipal retail water and discharge customers could contribute well less than a dollar per month; when coupled with modest investments from industry, the $75 Million financial goal is realistically achievable.