Water Works 39 - 1/7/04

Your State Taxes in Action

A glance at New Jersey’s State Plan Map will wrap up the serial digressions I’ve inflicted on you lately. Then we will hear the NJDEP’s side of the story of Quakertown’s failed wells.

Since the State Plan’s once-presumptive heir, BIG Map, now sleeps with the fishes (I warned you – 29), the State Plan Map is once again the top map in town. It says: except for our small commercial zone at Wal-Mart Plaza, where Franklin’s northern tip meets Interstate 78 and Clinton, and an even smaller tract designated “Rural” (Planning Area 4) on our far western border above Pittstown, 98% of Franklin Township is environmentally sensitive land. (i)

That small “Rural” tract aside, Franklin’s portion of the Hunterdon Plateau, including Quakertown and the whole southern half of the township, belongs to Planning Area 4-B. It’s all “Rural, Environmentally Sensitive,” along with most of the northern half of town, also classed in Area 4-B. The rest of the north is classed in Planning Area 5, indicating a merely “Environmentally Sensitive” environment. The particulars that distinguish Area 4-B from Area 5 can be spotted from any back yard in Franklin, depending on where you stand. What they share is more important. The State Plan designations of both areas make them two of the most environmentally sensitive places in Hunterdon County and New Jersey.

We know that fewer people live on any square mile of Franklin than in most Hunterdon towns, and most towns in the Pinelands, and that even fewer live near Quakertown. (38) We also know that Lockatong Creek, which begins next to Quakertown, is on track to join Capoolong Creek, which begins here too (22), as a strictly protected C-1 stream next May. (36) That’s all the stage-setting we need to review the NJDEP’s analysis of well failures in Quakertown’s Capoolong watershed in 1998. The NJDEP has to explain those failures to justify pumping more water than the amount pumped now from our already overdrawn Lockatong watershed, only yards from its Capoolong border.

Here is what the NJDEP’s fact finder says about “well complaints”: [1] “... the majority of them were near the intersection of Quakertown and Croton Roads, a topographically high area.” [2] “1998 and 1999 were extremely dry years and this region was in a severe drought ... the driest period in 105 years.” [3] “The number of replacement wells in Franklin Township was not considered to be excessive when compared to the number of replacement wells statewide. In 1998, approximately 2,300 wells were replaced statewide, Franklin Township had 7 replacement wells as compared to Delaware Township’s 9 ....” [4] “... many of the replaced wells in Franklin Township were shallow ....” [5] “Numerous other deeper wells had been installed in the immediate vicinity.” [6] “... in 1998 limits were placed upon pumping from QV-1 for irrigation use due to concerns with the possibility of impacts to private wells.” (ii)

Let’s start with item [6]. The NJDEP tells us nowhere that “QV-1” is the illegal irrigation well cited for violations in October, 1998, after household wells here failed for months, even though the NJDEP knew QV-1 had been drilled the previous May. By the time the NJDEP discovered that $5,000 per well, per day offense, the 1998 growing season was nearly over. (13) An almost identical violation and more well failures occurred in the same locations in 1997. (3)

With that in mind, let’s look at items [1] and [3]. Ignore for the moment the NJDEP’s “7 replacement wells” for all of Franklin Township in 1998 – it’s fiction. More were re-drilled and replaced in Quakertown alone before well QV-1 was shut down. More important, while [1] notes that our “well complaints” were all clustered near the illegal irrigation wells (22), [3] tells us that the number of “replacement wells” for all of New Jersey in 1998, when compared to an incorrect number of replacement wells for all of Franklin Township, justified the NJDEP’s conclusion that the tight cluster of well complaints in a single Franklin neighborhood – Quakertown – could be safely ignored.

More significant than the errors and omissions is the quality of reasoning on display. The State Plan should always guide the NJDEP, especially in environmentally critical areas like Quakertown. (Commissioner Campbell? Senator Lance? Are we together on this?) It is only reasonable then, to expect the NJDEP’s explanation for its actions here to at least survive the cursory examination we just began, without raising more questions than it answers.

Given what is at stake, can we seriously consider this compliance with the State Plan? (Commissioner? Senator? You’re both OK with that?) And the state’s taxpayers subsidized the performance. How OK are you with that, Commissioner? – Senator? – After all, you paid for it too.

Ron Gutkowski