A rising cancer rate blamed on water quality in rural, red Iowa has become a looming midterm campaign issue

A series of issues affecting rural America is giving hope to Democrats as the midterm elections approach, including data centers that are supported by President Trump but opposed by many communities, concerns about health care access, Medicaid cuts by Republicans that threaten the future of clinics and hospitals, housing shortages and inflation. Now in heavily red rural Iowa, Politico reports that a rising cancer rate blamed on water quality is        overshadowing other issues and is “changing Iowa politics.”

Photo by Shawn Schroeder on Unsplash

From the report by Tom Philpott and Nina B. Elkadi: “Iowa’s lakes and ponds are often murky and fetid from algae blooms fed by fertilizer runoff, a byproduct of the state’s vast agricultural industry’s reliance on farming chemicals … People are angry and worried about the quality of the state’s water, the health risks it poses and its increasingly undeniable tie to the state’s signature industry: agriculture.”

Politicians in Iowa have been hesitant to criticize the industry, Politico reports, but candidates in both parties are taking shots at the big companies and their use of chemicals and fertilizer that they claim has seeped into drinking water and has the state’s cancer rate rising dramatically.

The issue not only has raised the hopes of Democrats seeking statewide office in November, but appears to have delivered victories to Republicans who are bucking the establishment wing of the party.

Perhaps the best example of the strength of the issue is in the positions of the candidates for Iowa secretary of agriculture. The Democrat, Chris Jones, accuses the large farming operations of trying to control nature, “ … and what has controlling nature done for us?,” he asks. “It’s polluted all our water. It’s really destroyed a lot of Iowa.” 

Jones’ Republican opponent is the current secretary of agriculture, Mike Naig, who Politico observes, “can’t run on water.” Naig once worked for Monsanto, the producer of Roundup, a controversial herbicide. Naig thinks farming operations can be convinced to voluntarily pollute less, which is the current approach, and rejects the need for regulation. In a June press release, Naig said, “We have made tremendous progress working with farmers and landowners and hundreds of public and private partners to incorporate responsible farming practices, but there’s no finish line when it comes to conservation.”

Angry voters want results, and the election may come down to who they believe will deliver on water quality. Jones observed that, “Cancer doesn’t care what party you belong to. Republicans don’t like drinking poisonous water any more than Democrats do.”

Rural water operators can receive free expert guidance for water issues of all sizes through a new EPA program

RealWaterTA experts can help rural water operators address
federal compliance issues. (Photo by E. Ekdahl, Unsplash)

In an effort to help rural municipal water services that are facing challenges with aging infrastructure and federal compliance, the Environmental Protection Agency launched the Real Water Technical Assistance initiative in March, reports Claire Carlson of The Daily Yonder.

RealWaterTA connects "rural communities with experts like those at the National Rural Water Association to help them repair water utilities or help them apply for loans and grants through USDA’s Rural Development," Carlson writes. 

Rural community water treatment facilities are often understaffed, so having knowledgeable guidance while completing a detailed USDA application can take some of the grant-writing burden off water operators.

Charles Stephens, a senior executive policy director at the National Rural Water Association, believes the new program's approach, which provides expert guidance at no charge, will be useful to rural water operators. He told Carlson, "A lot of [rural] communities don’t need big, expensive projects; they need help making what they already have work better, or help getting into compliance with [federal] regulations."

Through RealWaterTA, rural communities can get help with addressing federal compliance standards, fixing aging systems and training new water operations staff. Carlson writes, "While the program itself will not provide money for these efforts, Stephens said it will act as an 'extra pair of hands' for rural communities that lack the staffing cities often have."

RealWaterTA specialists can help: 

• Local governments/communities
• Drinking water utilities/systems
• Wastewater utilities/systems
• Stormwater utilities/systems
• States, Tribes, territories
• Non-governmental organizations

Find program details here. To request RealWaterTA assistance, click here.

Brown tap water and an ongoing boil order highlights water systems under stress in rural towns

Brown water from a Tallulah residential tap.
(Photo by Donald Wood via WWNO)

In Tallulah, Louisiana and Cotton Plant, Arkansas, there's plenty of drinking water, but it runs brown from residential faucets and leaves stains on most things it touches.

Both small towns have sunk into debt paying for repairs to their aging water infrastructure. Despite those efforts, most Tallulah and Cotton Plant residents still face brown water in their taps, report Elise Plunk, Lucas Dufalla and Phillip Powell for New Orleans Public Radio, WWNO.

The water problems in both towns aren't isolated issues. Of the more than 45,000 community water systems that serve 10,000 people or less, "more than a third fell out of compliance with federal water standards sometime in the 12-month period that ended last September," WWNO reports. "For many of the 66 million Americans who live in rural places, [those systems] are the main source of water."

Tallulah used to be a vibrant town, but over time, its population dwindled, shrinking municipal tax revenue needed to repair aging water systems. Tallulah owned its water system and used its income to cover the rest of the town's needs, rather than investing in water system upgrades and repairs.

Some Tallulah residents purchased expensive filtering equipment, but even that hasn't been a full solution because the poor water quality breaks the filters.

Cotton Plant, Arkansas, residents have been dealing with "a boil order since last year, with little hope of securing the funds needed to fix an aging water system that is drowning in debt," Plunk writes. "The town’s water struggles started in 2023 and worsened in 2025, after a break in one of the main water lines sent discolored water rushing through residents’ taps."

Cotton Plant was a bustling agricultural town with 1,800 residents at its peak in 1950. According to WWNO, the town's water system is now too large and too expensive to be maintained by Cotton Plant's ever-shrinking population, which hovers at 530 people. Without tax revenue to address water system needs, the town borrowed money from the Arkansas Department of Agriculture and the USDA. Cotton Plant's water is still undrinkable.

This story was produced by the Mississippi River Basin Ag & Water Desk, an independent reporting network based at the University of Missouri, in partnership with Report for America.

Snow drought in Western states adds to regional water supply worries and takes a toll on winter tourism

Western states rely on winter snowpack for community
and farming water supplies. (Photo by Lamar, Unsplash)

Unlike most of the country, Western states are experiencing warmer-than-normal winter temperatures and haven't had enough snow to replenish water needed for drier months or sustain winter tourism, which helps to fuel their economy.

"An extreme snow drought and unusually warm weather are keeping skiers off the mountains, snowmobilers off the trails and water out of the rivers across much of the West," reports Jim Robbins for The New York Times.

Much of the West relies on thawing winter snowpack to provide water for residents, irrigation, trout streams and reservoirs throughout the year.

The lack of snowpack in the Colorado Rockies and the Colorado River Basin "adds to the 26-year-long megadrought in the region, which has led to extremely low levels in the two largest reservoirs on the Colorado River," Robbins explains. "Colorado is having its warmest winter since 1895."

The reason for the drastic change in snowfall and temperature between the last few years and this year "isn’t easily explained," Robbins adds. "Scientists have found that it is difficult to attribute the snow drought entirely to climate change."

Skiing tourism in Oregon has been particularly hard hit because there's been so little snow. Presley Quon, a spokesperson for Mt. Bachelor, a ski resort near Bend, Ore., told the Times, "It’s been a really rough season for ski resorts." Robbins adds, "Last year at this time, Mt. Bachelor had 109 inches of snow at its base; this year it has 27 inches."

At higher elevations, snowpack inches are at a more normal level; however, the runoff most communities rely on for water "comes from the middle and lower elevations, which cover a far greater area than the land at higher altitudes," Robbins explains. 

Despite the abysmal snowfall thus far, there's still time for snowpack levels to rebound. Robbins adds, "February, March and often April are the months when most of the snow usually falls in the mountains."

Forever chemicals in drinking water are a national problem, but smaller communities face the biggest challenge

Minnesota lawmakers learn about technology to remove PFAS.
(Photo by Tad Johnson, Dakota Tribune)

The costs of removing forever chemicals, or PFAS, from municipal water could leave smaller communities behind. Most rural utilities don't have a PFAS contaminant filtration system, nor can they afford one, a 2025 study found. "Small, rural communities are the least likely to have the advanced systems in place," reports Brian Bienkowski for The New Lede.

The technology to remove the long-lasting, human-made "forever chemicals" found in many commercial and industrial products that have been linked to a range of health risks, including several types of cancer, fertility issues and developmental delays in children, can cost millions of dollars to purchase and install.

Even smaller cities are struggling to cover the costs to remove forever chemicals. In Apple Valley, Minnesota, some of the expenses utilities are paying to bring PFAS levels in their drinking water into compliance with Environmental Protection Agency rules will "likely hike water rates [customers pay] to fund a $100 million project to rid its wells of PFAS," reports Eva Herscowitz of the Minnesota Star Tribune.

To help buffer the costs, Apply Valley is asking its legislature to "include $40 million in the 2026 bonding bill for the project that would add membrane filter technology, which would increase the treatment plant’s capacity from 18 million gallons per day to 20 MGD," reports Tad Johnson of Thisweek Dakota County Tribune.

Like many rural areas with higher levels of PFAS contaminants, Apple Valley can't trace the source of its forever chemicals, which has allowed some communities to tap lawsuit dollars from companies such as 3M that were found responsible for tainting regional wells.

The Environmental Study Group found that "just 8% of U.S. water systems are equipped with filters that can remove PFAS. And 98% of systems that have PFAS detections do not have treatment targeting the chemicals."

Dan Hartnett, the chief policy officer at the Association of Metropolitan Water Agencies, cited a report that "estimated annual household cost to pay for the advanced treatment methods would average an additional $230 per household per year," Bienkowski writes. Hartnett added, “The numbers were significantly higher for the smallest water systems."

Data center developments offer plenty of community reporting opportunities

U.S. data center infrastructure, with the relationship between the data center locations, transmission infrastructure and fiber optic networks. (NREL map, click to enlarge)

While rural areas may receive an economic boost from data center development in their community, the sprawling energy and water needs that AI hubs require can impact an entire region.

Data centers are a "relatively new kind of industrial infrastructure that environmental journalists may want to pay attention to," writes Joseph A. Davis for the Society of Environmental Journalists.

In areas that experience extremes of heat or cold, power-hungry AI can strain local electrical grids that may already be struggling to meet daily demand for local businesses and homes.

In addition to energy-gobbling, data centers also require enormous amounts of fresh water. Many communities across the U.S. are grappling with ongoing droughts and depleted aquifers. A data center build could leave its community thirsty.

According to Davis, here are story ideas to consider and ways to gather information:

• Find the data center(s) nearest you. Ask the PR people for a tour. There are helpful maplike resources from the National Renewable Energy Labs, Datacenters.com and Visual Capitalist.
• What is the power situation in your data center region? Do you ever have brownouts or energy conservation requests during AC season? Talk to your nearby electric utilities about load management.
• What zoning and permits do your burgeoning data centers need in order to build and operate? Have they got all the approvals they need? Did local authorities make any concessions to usual rules? Tax breaks?
• Where does the cooling water for your local data center, if any, come from? Are permits needed? What happens to the water that is discharged, and what are the heat effects on aquatic systems?
• How many jobs will be created during the construction of the data center? How many jobs after it is operating? Can local people fill them?
• Is your planned data center creating its own power plants to operate? Are they fossil-fueled? Green-powered? Nuclear? What are the environmental consequences?

Reporting resources:

• Data Center Coalition: This trade and lobbying group calls itself “The Voice of the Data Center Industry.”
• Utility companies: Power for many data centers comes from local electric utilities. Check in with your local utilities to see what requirements they have imposed (or waived) for the data center. Here’s a starting list.
• Zoning or planning boards: Siting of industrial facilities often requires approval from such bodies, or city and county councils. Find out what actions are pending and go to the meetings.
• Public utility commissions: Every state has a PUC that regulates local utilities. Check in with your PUC to see if your data center meets requirements. Here’s a list.

Pilot program that pays irrigating farmers for their water rights helps Nevada aquifers recover from overuse

Retiring groundwater rights helps depleted aquifers 
recover from overuse. (The Nature Conservancy map)

After years of battling water overuse by irrigating farmers, Nevada officials decided to use $25 million in federal funding to launch a pilot program that paid farmers for their water rights," reports Daniel Rothberg of The Daily Yonder. Once the state compensated irrigators for their groundwater rights, the state would retire the rights and no longer allow irrigation from that land, thereby conserving water.

Launched in 2023, the program has proved to be an effective way to protect some of the state's threatened aquifers. In fact, Nevada has used "federal funds to retire about 22,500 acre-feet of water, roughly the same amount of water Nevada was required to cut from its Colorado River allocation last year," Rothberg explains.

State water officials have been pleasantly surprised at how popular the pay-for-groundwater-rights option has become. Rothberg reports, "There was so much demand that two bills, passed unanimously by the Democratic-controlled Legislature and signed by Republican Gov. Joe Lombardo in 2025, allow for the expansion of the program."

After asking lots of questions, alfalfa farmer Denise Moyle decided to sell some of her groundwater rights to the state. Moyle shared the thought process she and many area farmers consider when debating groundwater rights sales: "If I sell a little bit of water and I pay off debt, do I have to farm as hard? Do I have to pump as hard? Do I have to go for three (alfalfa) cuttings? Can I just do two cuttings?"

Meanwhile, state water officials and conservationists are considering how to keep the program going, which could lean on donations and federal funding. "A donation could target a specific area or ecosystem in need of protection from groundwater overuse," Rothberg explains. "But state funding would help to raise matching federal dollars and maximize the program’s value."

Journalists can help rural communities by reporting on local drinking water data and quality

The EPA maintains the Safe Drinking Water Information System. Users can click on states or use search tools.

Rural communities need journalists who investigate and report on local and more regional drinking water issues, from tainted wells to water that runs brown and few people would voluntarily drink.

The Safe Drinking Water Information System is online, searchable and a place to start exploring area-specific data. SDWIS data is managed by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency and required by the Safe Drinking Water Act, writes Joseph A. Davis for the Society of Professional Journalists. Access SDWIS here.

The act requires more "public disclosure than almost any other environmental law. The data is all there (mostly), although SDWIS is not that easy to use," Davis explains. "It really helps if you know the official name of the drinking water system you are interested in."

U.S. water systems come in all sizes, and some regional water services have surprising regulations. Davis writes, "A Girl Scout summer camp’s well system may not even operate year-round. But it’s still a 'community water system' that must meet the act’s requirements."

For communities with more than 10,000 residents, the Consumer Confidence Report contains vital data. "It tells people whether the water meets standards (or doesn’t), and what the contaminants of concern are," Davis writes. Reporters may want to remind readers that not all contaminants are regulated.

Other tips include looking into lead and bacterial levels. Davis adds, "Groundtruth everything you can. Talk to water users and system operators instead of relying merely on data. Go to utility board meetings. Taste the water. Visit the source."

Scientists 'drill, baby, drill,' and find freshwater deep beneath the ocean floor off the North Atlantic coast

The U.S. already faces a freshwater crisis, brought on by drought, higher temperatures, overuse and pollution. But a scientific dig into the North Atlantic seafloor more than 50 years ago could offer a surprising solution. "It found, of all things. . . fresh water," report Calvin Woodward, Carolyn Kaster and Rodrique Ngowi of The Associated Press. 

Fast forward to this summer, when researchers were following up on the past discovery. "A first-of-its-kind global research expedition [is] drilling for fresh water under the salt water off Cape Cod," AP reports. Researchers pulled thousands of water samples from what is now "thought to be a massive, hidden aquifer stretching from New Jersey as far north as Maine."

Do these freshwater troves exist in coastal areas around the globe? Scientists agree that it's likely that the aquifers exist in shallow salt waters around the world. Even so, the "secret fresh water" comes with a litany of challenges, from how to get it to the surface without harming surrounding marine life to questions about who owns it.

As data centers and record heat in some areas rapidly slurp up fresh water, researchers and world leaders are motivated to finance a different kind of drilling. AP reports, "No one globally had drilled systematically into the seabed on a mission to find freshwater."

Under-ocean water samples are being analyzed to discover where they came from, how old they are and what microorganisms thrive in water hidden under the ocean. The discovery and sampling are so dramatic that some scientists are ecstatic. Geophysicist Rob Evans, whose 2015 expedition helped point the way, told AP, “There’s a ton of excitement that finally they’ve got samples.”

Iowa's water is polluted with farming nitrates and pesticides, but a potential solution challenges the 'status quo'

Crop and animal farm runoff has polluted at least
four Iowa rivers. (Adobe Stock photo)

In agriculturally dominated Iowa, what's good for corn producers gets top billing while residents face a deluge of polluted water. "In Iowa, which by some measures has the most polluted water in the U.S., people who advocate for the environment are widely scorned as enemies of farming," reports Peter Waldman of Bloomberg.

In a state where farmers spread copious amounts of pesticides, nitrogen fertilizers and nitrogen-rich manure, towns like Remsen, which is surrounded by Iowa corn country, are "saturated with pollution," Waldman writes. "Researchers have linked trace exposures to nitrate in drinking water to cancers, birth defects and thyroid disease. Iowa has the second-highest cancer rate in the U.S., after Kentucky."

Although concerned citizens, including many farmers, have pushed for fewer pesticides and nitrates, most efforts failed. "The state government has crushed almost every effort to hold farmers and agribusinesses accountable for their increasingly dirty footprint," Waldman explains. Last year, the EPA ordered Iowa to "add parts of four rivers to the state’s list of impaired waters needing cleanup, including the drinking supply for about a fifth of Iowa’s population."

Even with some of the state's drinking water in question, the state complained about the EPA's sanction, which the Trump administration lifted. Waldman reports, "Now even the feds defer to Big Ag, led in Iowa by the industry’s undisputed champion in the state, the Iowa Farm Bureau Federation."

Remsen is located in eastern Plymouth County, 
in the heart of Iowa's corn belt. (Adobe Stock photo)

Without support, Remsen's water continued to be polluted. Despite investigations, area wells were allowed to fill with possibly toxic nitrates. "From 2016 to 2020, Remsen’s five-year rate of colorectal cancer, one of the cancers associated with nitrate exposure, was 19% higher than Iowa’s," Waldman adds. "By 2017, the shallow wells that supplied Remsen’s drinking water were so loaded with nitrates they had to be shut down."

Farming without so many nitrates and pesticides is possible. Matt Liebman, a retired agronomy professor at Iowa State, told Waldman, "What it takes to grow food with less pollution isn’t a mystery. . . .But the solution threatens the status quo. You can’t sell as much fertilizer, hybrid seeds or animal feed. For those companies, the solution is the problem.”

West Virginia's waterway 'reclamation' yields cleaner water, rare earth metals and a growing outdoor industry

Deckers Creek is flowing with fresh water and 
wildlife again. (Wikipedia photo)

Coal mines left waterways across West Virginia polluted by sulfuric acid and metals, but that’s not the end of their story. "Set on a quiet hillside, a series of cascading ponds are doing their small part to fix a big problem," reports Mira Rojanasakul of The New York Times. The three-pond system slowly "reclaims" the state's waterways for wildlife and people to enjoy once again, and it comes with a side benefit of rare earth elements.

The three-pond system works to reduce water acid and then remove metals. The first pond allows water to "percolate through limestone and organic matter," Rojanasakul explains. The second pond completes more filtration, allowing the aluminum to drop out. By the time the water flows from the third pond, the iron has dropped out. "Fish and sensitive species like salamanders and frogs are returning to Deckers Creek, which for decades flowed rust-orange and lifeless from iron and other pollution."

Deckers Creeks is "one of dozens of cleanup sites being installed across West Virginia, helping the state make progress on a global environmental issue: waterways poisoned from coal mining," Rojanasakul reports. "A few miles downstream, a new, higher-tech version of this cleanup process is yielding an unexpected bonus: 'Rare earth' elements, essential for clean energy technologies and military equipment, are being recovered from the pollution."

Decreasing water acidity and removing metals isn’t just helpful for wildlife and biodiversity -- acid mine drainage "can corrode pipes and threaten drinking water for many residents of rural West Virginia who rely on backyard wells," Rojanasakul writes. 

Federal and state officials help guide West Virginia's waterway reclamation efforts, but the "boots on the ground" are often small nonprofits. Rojanasakul adds, "They monitor sprawling watersheds and build relationships within communities, even talking private landowners into opening up their backyards for cleanup work."

Many locals view their reclaimed waterways as a potential path to a new revenue source for residents and the state. Rojanasakul reports, "Employment in the state’s outdoor recreation economy is starting to rival other industries, with 20,300 jobs in 2023 compared with 17,700 workers in mining and support activities that same year."

The Natural Resources Defense Council offers a new map of lead pipes, which are a problem in all 50 states

For investigative reporters tracking lead pipes that still deliver drinking water, the Natural Resources Defense Council’s new Lead Pipe Data Map Tool is a smart place to start exploring.

“Whether you want the local or the national perspective, this data map looks to be the most current and detailed available,” reports Joseph A. Davis of the Society of Environmental Journalists. “We care about lead in drinking water because it is a neurotoxin that robs children of IQ points and causes a host of other health problems, even in adults.”

The news about lead-tainted water in Flint, Michigan, may have sparked outrage, but “lead pipes in water systems are a serious problem in all 50 states,” Davis writes. “The Environmental Protection Agency updated its Lead and Copper Rule in October 2024. . . .The Bipartisan Infrastructure Law of November 2021, committed $15 billion to fund the replacement of lead service lines that take water from mains to individual buildings (the main source of the problem).”

Under the new Lead and Copper Rule, all drinking water systems must inventory their lead service lines and report their findings to the EPA. “Much of the data comes from the EPA as utilities report in,” Davis explains. “The map not only tallies known lead service lines — but also service lines whose metal composition is unknown or estimated.”

To use the data efficiently, focus on the NRDC’s mapping tools and remember that utility service areas can differ from municipal boundaries. Davis reports, “One of the nifty features NRDC gives you is the ability to add multiple overlays to the map as you use it.” 

Find the tiny icons in the top-left and top-right corners of the map to alter map layers. The mapping overlay feature can also show active lead pipes according to their congressional district.

While data and numbers don’t tell the full story, they provide a good foundation for a narrative to take shape. Davis also advises gathering information from your community:

• Ask water customers about their awareness of lead pipes carrying drinking water. What's their ability to pay for service line replacement?
• Talk to utilities about their plans and concerns regarding pipe replacement. 
• Discuss drinking water safety and remaining lead pipes with state and EPA/state regulators.
• Ask your congressperson how budget cuts could affect funding for this critical work.

As the battle over water fluoridation continues, rural Americans are at risk for higher rates of tooth decay

Thirteen states and the counties in gray don't report data on fluoride and drinking water to CDC.
(Map by Brett Kelman, Harvard University study from Census and CDC data)

As states consider banning tap water fluoridation mandates, rural America may be at risk for higher rates of tooth decay and its accompanying health problems. "Dozens of communities have decided to stop fluoridating in recent months, and state officials in Florida and Texas have urged their water systems to do the same," reports Brett Kelman of KFF Health News. "Utah is poised to become the first state to ban it in tap water."

Advocates for banning water fluoridation often cite "a government report last summer that found a possible link between lower IQ in children and consuming amounts of fluoride that are higher than what is recommended in American drinking water," Kelman explains. "The report was based on an analysis of 74 studies conducted in other countries, most of which were considered 'low quality' and involved exposure of at least 1.5 milligrams of fluoride per liter of water — or more than twice the U.S. recommendation."

Even as the battle over fluoridation continues, rural Americans already struggle to access basic dental care. Kelman reports, "Republican efforts to extend tax cuts and shrink federal spending may squeeze Medicaid, which could deepen existing shortages of dentists in rural areas where many residents depend on the federal insurance program for whatever dental care they can find."

Removing fluoride from rural water sources could exacerbate dental decay and the numerous other health problems it causes. "Dental experts warn that the simultaneous erosion of Medicaid and fluoridation could exacerbate a crisis of rural oral health," Kelman writes. "The changes could reverse decades of progress against tooth decay, particularly for children and those who rarely see a dentist."

Rural America already has large pockets with few dentists and unfluoridated water. A Harvard study "identified over 780 counties where more than half of the residents live in a [dentist] shortage area. Of those counties, at least 230 also have mostly or completely unfluoridated public drinking water," Kellman explains. "That means people in these areas who can’t find a dentist also do not get protection for their teeth from their tap water."

Several peer-reviewed studies give a glimpse into what ending water fluoridation could look like. Kelman writes, "Studies of cities in Alaska and Canada have shown that communities that stopped fluoridation saw significant increases in children’s cavities when compared with similar cities that did not."

Many Americans favor fluoridation, but "a sizable minority does not," Kelman notes. "Polls from Axios/Ipsos and AP-NORC found that 48% and 40% of respondents wanted to keep fluoride in public water supplies, while 29% and 26% supported its removal."

The debate over fluoride in public water may just be getting started: Local stories and knowledge can help

Fluoride is a mineral that helps prevent
tooth decay. (Photo by G. Rosenke, Unsplash)

The decades-long practice of adding fluoride to public water supplies to prevent tooth decay is under fire from anti-fluoride activists, including "fluoride foe Robert F. Kennedy Jr., who was tapped for a top spot overseeing public health as head of the Department of Health and Human Services," reports Joseph A. Davies for the Society for Environmental Journalists. Kennedy wants "to remove fluoride from drinking water, and President-elect Trump has said he supports the idea."

Adding fluoride to public water sources began in the 1940s; however, the decision to add fluoride is not made at the federal level. Davis explains, "The federal government has no legal authority to require fluoride in drinking water — not the EPA or any other agency. But some 13 states (plus Washington, D.C., and Puerto Rico) do — they currently have laws requiring utilities to add fluoride to drinking water. Hawaii is the only state to prohibit it. . . . Not only that, but laws in 37 states allow local governments and utilities to choose for themselves."

Davis writes, "The public should know the facts. For environmental journalists, that means local stories."

A recent court case won by anti-fluoride activists "ordered the EPA to reevaluate its rule on fluoride in drinking water, using the Toxic Substances Control Act rather than the SDWA (Safe Drinking Water Act)," Davis explains. "The suit came after controversial research by the Department of Health and Human Services’ National Toxicology Program suggested fluoride could harm the IQ of growing kids."

The political atmosphere and anti-fluoride sentiment by some citizens is pushing the fluoride debate into more local community spaces. Davis shares these story ideas and sources.

Story ideas:

• Does your state require fluoride to be added to public drinking water systems? Talk to your state regulators.
• What are the main drinking water utilities in your audience area? Do they add fluoride? Talk to local managers about the issue.
• Does fluoride occur naturally in the source water(s) of your local utilities? How much? Is it below or above the maximum contaminant level (MCL)?
• Does your utility fully inform customers about fluoride in water (as they are legally required to under the SDWA)?
• What does your local or state health department think about fluoride in drinking water?
• Talk to your dentist and other local dentists about their views on fluoride.
  

Reporting resources:

• U.S. Environmental Protection Agency: The EPA oversees implementation of the Safe Drinking Water Act, with most enforcement carried out by the states.
• Centers for Disease Control: The main U.S. public health agency.
• National Institutes of Health: This scientific research agency has studied fluoride in water.
• World Health Organization: This international public health agency has recommended a level for fluoride in drinking water.
• American Dental Association: The main professional association for general dentists in the United States.
• Fluoride Action Network: A nongovernmental organization that opposes addition of fluoride to drinking water.
• Food & Water Watch: A nonprofit NGO opposed to fluoride in drinking water.

Forty-eight states face moderate drought, which affects groundwater supplies, agriculture and river transportation

Drought caused this sunflower crop to fail.
(Adobe Stock photo)

This summer's scorching heat may be over, but across the United States a lack of soil-absorbed rainfall has left most states facing drought conditions. "More than 150 million people in the country – and 149.8 million in the 48 contiguous states – are in a drought this week. That is about a 34% increase since last week and an over 150% increase since last month," reports Marina Dunbar of The Guardian. Drought is present in every state except Alaska and Kentucky, in fact, this is the greatest number of states in drought in U.S. Drought Monitor history.

Drought conditions aren't just about lack of rainfall, they "are driven and exacerbated by abnormally high temperatures that can quickly suck moisture from the atmosphere and the earth," Dunbar explains. "Droughts can occur even when there is slightly more rain than usual, depending on the frequency of rainfall. If there is a lot of rain all at once, it’s difficult for the water to be properly absorbed into the ground."

National Integrated Drought Information System data

When droughts occur, groundwater supplies get tapped, which can take weeks, months or centuries to replenish. "According to the National Integrated Drought Information System, droughts will increase an area’s reliance on groundwater. Groundwater provides more than 40% of the water used for U.S. agriculture and domestic water supplies. Increased pumping during droughts can reduce the future availability of those supplies."

Meanwhile, dry conditions have a domino effect on water sources, agriculture production and commodities trading. "Low water levels on rivers and other waterways [can cause] ports and other water-borne transportation to become limited due to a reduction in available routes and cargo-carrying capacity, which increases transportation costs. . . That cost increase is ultimately transferred to consumers, who see it in the form of higher-priced products, groceries and other commodities."

Is sewage sludge used on farms and golf courses in your community? Tips for journalists to investigate issues.

A sewage sludge treatment tank in Scottdale, Penn.
(USDA photo, Lance Cheung via Flickr CC)

It may not sound pretty, but looking into sewage sludge disposal practices can be a story that helps your community's health. "There was a time when the Environmental Protection Agency renamed toxic sludge as 'biosolids,' and journalists went along with it," reports Joseph A. Davis of the Society of Environmental Journalists. "As we are becoming aware of more and more toxic chemicals, it is hardly a surprise that we are finding them in sewage sludge. The surprise is that some farmers are spreading them on their fields."

The multiple contaminants within sewage sludge are a health threat to humans and the environment because PFAS or "forever chemicals" can be present in sludge; however, sludge pollutants can also include "heavy metals like lead, other toxic organics like dioxins, PCBs, pharmaceuticals whose names you can’t even pronounce," Davis explains. "The problem gets much harder when you realize there are thousands of individual PFAS chemicals. Not to mention all the other chemical families."

The problems with sludge, even when treated, or labeled "biosolids" remain extensive. EPA rules may not be enough to keep people and nature safe because current rules "allow — some say encourage — sterilized, dried sludge to be spread on fields, golf courses, etc," Davis writes. "The big question is whether harmful chemicals are getting into people’s food and water."

Davis offers the following story ideas:

• Where does your sewage go when you flush the toilet? Talk to your local sewage treatment agencies and ask them what they do with their sewage sludge.
• Ask who takes the bulk of processed sludge from your local agencies? There may be companies who distribute it in large quantities to farmers, golf courses, etc., who apply it to land. Talk to them. Talk to their customers.
• The EPA has to review its 'biosolids' rules every two years to see whether they should be updated as new contaminants come to light. What do local sewage officials and environmental advocates think about the EPA’s performance?
• Some disposal of sewage sludge on land requires a National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (water pollution) permit. Check the permit database for permittees. Check the EPA’s ECHO enforcement database for violators. Talk to permittees and permitting agencies.
• Does your local sludge go into the retail market? What companies and brands sell it? Ask for their test results on chemical contamination. Figure out what they didn’t test for.
• Talk to groundskeepers or managers at local golf courses. Do they use sludge products on their courses? What can you learn about the run-off situation?
• Go to meetings of local garden clubs and community gardens. Or visit on-site. Ask members what they do, especially with vegetable gardens.

Reporting resources:

• U.S. Environmental Protection Agency: The agency sets the standards for land application of sludge.
• Local sewage treatment agencies: You can find them in the EPA’s ICIS-NPDES database using SIC code 4952.
• National Association of Clean Water Agencies: The NACWA is a lobby and professional group of municipal sewage treatment agencies.
• Center for Food Safety: A nonprofit group that advocates for food safety.
• Regional biosolids groups: Find some listed here.
• Food & Water Watch: A nonprofit environmental advocacy group that follows the sludge-agriculture issue.
• Water Environment Federation: A professional and scientific organization whose members work in the sewage and water industries.

Public water is tested for toxins, but private well-water is not; some residents push for required testing to save lives

Well water that looks and tastes clean isn't always
contaminant free. (Photo by A. Sikdar, Unsplash)

Water used by public utilities is subject to testing and contaminant limits, but well water from private wells is not. Around 43 million Americans drink, bathe and cook with water from private wells that have never been tested, which often leaves them unaware of what's in their water, reports Silvia Foster-Frau of The Washington Post. "The levels and pervasiveness of some contaminants in [private] wells are increasing, studies show."

Public drinking water is regulated by the Environmental Protection Agency, which sets ceilings for toxins; however, water from private wells is excluded from the agency's oversight. "The agency doesn’t regulate the drinking water of the more than 1 in 10 people who get their water from their own private wells," Foster-Frau writes. Private well owners often believe that their water is fresher and purer than "city water" because it's drawn directly from the earth, but that's often not the case. "Experts say private wells can be a breeding ground for a host of toxins, from dangerous bacteria to known carcinogens."

Especially in rural areas, where residents often want more independence from regulation, conflicts have grown as some individuals want required water well testing and others want it to be their choice. In the case of Cathy Cochrane, a resident in Toutle, Washington, who is struggling with cancer, she would have preferred the county had required private well testing. Foster-Frau reports, "Cochrane discovered that the water she had been drinking for nearly a decade contained 638 parts per billion of arsenic, a toxin that can cause cancer and increase the risk of diabetes and heart disease. . . . There is no reliable way to tell if cancer is caused by arsenic versus other factors."

Arsenic occurs naturally in soil, so many residents don't give it a second thought -- or they don't realize it's there to begin with. Cochrane told Foster-Frau, "Arsenic is the perfect murder weapon. You can’t detect it.” After Cochrane spoke at a Toutle commission meeting, "The commissioners agreed to extend a public water supply line from the town of Toutle to Cochrane’s neighborhood, less than a mile away."

Cochrane's presentation spurred further inquiry. "Central Washington University graduate student William Hays has taken up the issue as his thesis project," Foster-Frau adds. "He has been knocking on doors in the Toutle area where Cochrane lives and requesting samples of water from private wells. He wants to understand just how far the naturally occurring arsenic is spread throughout the county, which would provide insight into the scope of the contaminated water problem."

California declared 'clean water for all' as a basic human right, but that promise isn't a reality for many rural areas

Aging systems can contribute to contaminated
water. (Photo by Daniel Fazio, Unsplash)

California declared clean drinking water a human right in 2012, but that promise remains a work in progress as residents in more rural or underserved counties still drink contaminated water, reports Ian James of the Los Angeles Times. "Approximately 913,000 Californians depended on public water systems that are failing to comply with drinking water regulations, while an additional 1.5 million people depended on water systems that are determined to be 'at-risk.'" The price tag for clean, affordable water "for all" rings in at $15.9 billion.

Risky water tends to be poured from taps in small, more rural communities. Joaquin Esquivel, chair of the state water board, told James, "What our analysis has shown time and again is that the common denominator is size. Small systems struggle, especially in communities that have experienced discrimination and disinvestment, and their challenges will be amplified as the weather grows more extreme, new contaminants emerge and costs increase.”

The contaminated water some rural Californians are using, many Americans might rightfully refuse to drink. "The water pumped from wells contains harmful levels of contaminants including naturally occurring arsenic, bacteria from sewage leaks, nitrate from animal manure, fertilizers or other sources, and carcinogenic chemicals," James explains. Many water systems "have at least one contaminant at levels that violate safe drinking water standards."

Getting regional water systems in line with safe drinking standards takes more than funding. It takes people and planning. "The estimated costs of solutions in the latest report were substantially higher than previous state estimates," James writes. "According to the report, the estimated costs of long-term solutions for failing and at-risk public water systems total $6.6 billion over five years, while the costs of solutions for 'high-risk' small water systems and domestic wells total $4.9 billion."

But those numbers don't include everything. James explains, "Those combined costs, totaling more than $11.5 billion, would be significantly higher if loan repayment costs and operations and maintenance costs are included, the report said, pushing the total estimated cost of 'achieving the human right to water' to $15.9 billion."

It's a total California may not be prepared to pay. James adds, "Officials projected that $2 billion in state grant funds will be available over five years, as well as $1.5 billion in state loans, leaving a substantial gap in available funding."

Opinion: U.S. must invest in water infrastructure or face cities and towns with problems like Atlanta, or worse

Old pipes are just one part of U.S. water infrastructure
that needs repair and redesign. (Adobe Stock photo)

Reflecting on the recent water pipe bursts in Atlanta, Joseph W. Kane discusses the unwanted but predictable tide of water problems that await U.S. cities and towns in his opinion for Brookings.

"The country is once again grappling with an age-old conundrum: how to stay ahead of an increasingly intractable list of water infrastructure challenges," Kane explains. "From Flint, Mich., to Jackson, Miss., to a seemingly unending number of urban and rural communities, the country's water infrastructure is aging and in need of repair."

The "fix-it" list contains a litany of put-off or ignored problems that, should they remain on the back burner, will become an "Atlanta-sized" problem or worse. "Contaminated drinking water, including lead pollution, leaking pipes, sewer overflows, and other chronic issues persist too," Kane writes. "The ripple effects of these failures are also extensive across different systems, leading to network failures across neighborhoods and entire regions."

America's water bill is enormous, and the work that must be undertaken is staggering. "More than $600 billion in investment is estimated to be needed over the next 20 years to keep up with all the necessary improvements, according to the latest EPA national water assessments," Kane adds. "The financial pressure is immense on local utilities — and other state agencies — who are constantly trying to cobble together enough resources to stay ahead of these needs."

How do we create solutions? "The first step is to establish increased, sustained federal water funding. While the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act pumped about $57 billion into a host of different water infrastructure improvements, this figure still pales in comparison to the price tags noted earlier," Kane writes. "The second step is to support continued local and state experimentation. While many utilities are struggling to simply keep up with existing repairs, that should not be an excuse for failing to test more proactive and collaborative solutions."

New Bureau of Land Management rule puts conservation work 'on equal footing' with commercial land uses

Photo by Bob Wick, Bureau of Land Management via the Montana Free Press

Five years ago, leasing land for conservation purposes wasn't allowed, but leasing it for commercial uses was. A new Bureau of Land Management rule has changed that dynamic. "The BLM adopted a long-awaited rule that aims to put conservation initiatives 'on equal footing' with oil and gas leasing, grazing and other commercial uses of federal land," reports Amanda Eggert of the Montana Free Press. "This shift by the country's largest land manager has been applauded by conservation and environmental organizations and criticized by oil and gas and agricultural groups."

The rule intends to "allow the BLM to lease land for 'restoration' and 'mitigation.' The agency said these leases will help it meet water security, biodiversity and climate objectives," Eggert writes. White House Council on Environmental Quality Chair Brenda Mallory said in a release, "From the most rugged backcountry spots to popular close-to-home recreation areas, these reforms will help deliver cleaner water, healthier lands, abundant wildlife, and more recreation opportunities for all of us."

The Business for Montana's Outdoors and The Wilderness Society applauded the rules, while the Western Energy Alliance criticized it as government overreach. WEA President Kathleen Sgamma told Eggert, "There are hundreds of millions of acres set aside for wilderness and national parks. . . . But there are also working landscapes all across the West that provide food, fuel and fiber for all Americans." Eggert adds, "She anticipates her group will file a lawsuit to overturn the rule."

Eggert reports, "The BLM manages more than eight million acres in Montana, making it the state's second-largest land manager behind the U.S. Forest Service. . . . The agency received more than 216,000 comments on the proposal during a 90-day public comment period it initiated last spring."