Economics in a watershed

Watershed protection is the main goal and idea behind this discussion, but how much
does it cost? What effect do these changes bring economically to these developing
regions and communities, landowners and residents? This question is brought up in every
debate regarding watershed protection, as changes cant be made without capital. There
are many economic benefits of protecting a watershed. Investing in the future of a
watershed may have high upfront cost but in turn it will actually be cost affective in
regards to water treatment.
In a study of 27 US water suppliers, researchers found that protecting forested
watersheds used for drinking water sources can reduce capital, operational and
maintenance costs for drinking water treatment. They found that watersheds with
greater percentages of protected forest correlate to fewer water treatment
expenditures
You maybe thinking, what does protecting forested land have to do with a watershed? It
has been proven that land with high retention in natural green infrastructure actually
minimizes property damage and cleanup costs from flood damage. When land is covered
by forested type terrain, it prevents runoff from moving rapidly across the landscape and
allows it to slowly infiltrate into the soil, reducing erosion and high flows. A healthy
watershed will reduce the area and impact of a flood, minimize the economic burden on
public infrastructure, reduce erosion and water treatment costs and can restore natural
groundwater recharge.
Naranpur
As stated earlier the water quality is extremely poor in Narapur. Although many agree
they want to fix this issue or find a way to continue their current lifestyle they cant. The
population is concerned with growing crops to use for feed or person family use. These
villagers continue to use fertilizers and pesticides which is a main driving force behind
the water quality. For many years now there has been talk that there is a direct link
between water and air quality to human health. Urbanization has negative impacts on
river and stream water quality and associated economic benefits. This is a major issue we
have dealt with in Naranpur. When government or a community voice pursues a water
quality improvement policy, for example regulation of polluting which could include
implementation of urban land use controls. There is always winners and loser when a
policy is enacted. Losses are typically straightforward as it may reduce ones profits and
increase consumers cost. Gains on the other hand are often more difficult to measure,
especially when they come in the form of public goods such as water quality.

Rio Grande-Albuquerque Watershed

As the main focus is to maintain safe and clean drinking water the US has implemented
many acts to ensure this. The EPA has set standards on water quality through the Safe
Drinking Water Act and the Clean Water Act. While looking into the Rio Grande
Watershed I found that a large jet fuel spill had happened recently affecting the
groundwater of thousands of people. Many economic cost are associated with the
pollution of water in a watershed. Some of the obvious economic costs of water pollution
include reduced recreational value of rivers, streams, and lakes, including boating,
fishing, and swimming. This also diminished value of commercial fishing in streams,
estuaries, and oceans; and the lost use of private water wells due to chemical and
biological contamination. The chemical contaminants is what Albuquerque is faced with
today with the jet fuel spill. Who pays the cost of water pollution and depletion? The
people. The investors in these large industrial and agricultural businesses reap the
economic benefit of their inevitable pollution and depletion of water; the people in
surrounding communities and in society in general ultimately pay the costs.
Xining, China Watershed
There are many factors leading to the deterioration of the aquatic environment in the
Xining Watershed. Studies have shown that a large number of construction projects and
the discharge of waste water without treatment both within the boundary are the main
factors causing the pollution. In areas like Xining, industrial type business isnt so
predominant as agricultural. Agricultural lands received water so polluted that it was
unfit for use, leading to significant loss of grain production. When there is soil pollution,
which not only threatens the food supply and safety, but also endangers the public health,
and damages the ecological system in some regions. All of these things effect the
economy of each water shed in some way. Everything cost some amount in the world
today. Digging a problem deeper and deeper is only creating a large cost to fix the issue
we create.

Sources:
http://www.dw.com/en/how-much-is-pollution-costing-chinas-economy/a-18323476
http://www.homerdixon.com/projects/state/chinaeco/pollut.htm
http://web.missouri.edu/ikerdj/papers/Wisconsin%20-%20Water%20Pollution
%20Depletion.htm
http://www.eldis.org/go/home&id=33800&type=Document#.VikKV4SYeLI