Efficiency is different than conservation. Efficiency means using less water all of the time – being more efficient. Conservation means using less water during emergencies like a drought – conserving scarce water resources. In 2006 the state passed water conservation rules, but did not, in the end, require efficiency.

The history: Much of the state experienced a severe drought in 2002, when some local governments came within hours of running out of water. In the aftermath of that drought, the NC General Assembly passed a law (S.L. 2002-167) telling the state Environmental Management Commission (EMC) to adopt water conservation rules. When the legislation was introduced, the rules would have included both efficiency (using less all the time) and conservation (using less during emergencies, like a drought). But, late in the legislative processes, special interests convinced legislators to require conservation only during droughts, and to make all efficiency measures voluntary. Droughts are the least effective time to begin conserving, since at that point, key decisions that affect demand – like whether to install water efficient appliances or use of drought tolerant landscaping – have already been made. The final drought conservation rules are in the NC Administrative Code (15A NCAC 02E .0601 et seq.)

North Carolina can do far better in using its water resources efficiently. In 2000 (the most recent federal data), North Carolinians used an estimated 177 gallons of water per person per day. That’s a little better than the national average of 185 gallons per person per day, but far worse than the five best states, which use only 109 – 137 gallons per person per day.

We hope the current drought is a spur for the legislature to revisit the issue, and authorize the NC Environmental Management Commission to issue standards for water use efficiency. Over the long term, efficiency all the time will do much more than heroic conservation during droughts to build a sustainable future for North Carolina.

Note: Per capita water use for North Carolina cited is calculated based on the USGS 2000 Estimated Use of Water in the United States. Per capita water use statistics for other states are taken from a study in Florida (pdf document), which is ultimately based on the same USGS data.

Linking growth decisions to water supplies.

North Carolina already requires public water systems to plan ahead for future water needs and submit reports to the state Division of Water Resources. The reports describe current capacity, future expected growth in demand, and, where necessary, plans for meeting future demand. In general, these reports have had significant accuracy problems: some small towns want desperately to look like they are growing, and project wildly high growth rates, while other communities, in denial about the need to build expensive new infrastructure facilities, project unrealistically low future demand. The state adds up all the local plans to develop the State Water Supply Plan.

The problem is that there is no required link between local growth decisions, such as whether to approve a 10,000 house subdivision, and anything in the water supply plans. The statutes that give cities and counties authority for planning and approving growth need to be updated to require that they ensure that there will be adequate water (including during a drought) and water infrastructure before approving new growth.

Update our water laws for the 21st century.

How limited water supplies are divided up among all the various possible uses is ultimately both a legal and a political question. The experience of the much drier western states has shown that, when the laws do not provide a clear answer, water allocation questions become highly political, and the natural environment usually suffers.

The United States inherited two basic systems of water allocation law: the riparian system and the prior appropriation system. The prior appropriation system, used in most western states, says that water belongs to whoever made use of it first, with little regard for the interests of other, later users. The riparian system, originally followed by most eastern states, dates back centuries to the English common law. It says that landowners beside a river can make reasonable use of the water to the extent that their use does not injure upstream or downstream landowners. Over the last few decades, many East Coast states have updated their laws, replacing obsolete laws with statutes that protect the ecological health of rivers and explicitly balance the other uses: drinking water, industry, energy generation, and agriculture. North Carolina has not updated our laws in a very long time.

Instead of modernizing our water laws, North Carolina’s legislature has enacted narrow laws to deal with specific issues. The Interbasin Transfer Act of 1994 (GS 143-215) requires state approval of transfers of more than two million gallons per day from one river basin to another. The Water Use Act of 1967 (GS143-215.11-.22) allows the Environmental Management Commission (EMC) to declare special zones – capacity use areas – where water supplies are running low, and issue rules for water use in those zones. So far, the EMC has only declared two capacity use areas, both in response to declining groundwater levels. While both of these state statutes have been important tools, they do not address water allocation comprehensively. In addition, they are unpredictable, and do not provide long term certainty for businesses and local governments trying to plan ahead.

It is much easier to pass fair and comprehensive water laws before a state begins to bump up against the limits of available water supplies. States that have waited too long have found that special interests begin to take over the discussion – and, since there isn’t enough water to meet everyone’s current needs, all compromises are lose-lose. North Carolina still has abundant water most of the time. An overhaul of our water laws could still result in win-win compromises for most interests. That’s why it is so important that state leaders modernize North Carolina’s water laws now, before our water allocation problems become too politically hard to solve.

Fortunately, just this year, the NC General Assembly passed a bill, S.L. 2007-518, that among other provisions calls for a legislative study commission on North Carolina’s water resources and laws. There’s no guarantee that the study commission will recommend an overhaul of the state’s water law, though that is certainly a possibility. A new water law would have to be negotiated among major interest groups, but a good starting point – one that the NC Conservation Network broadly supports – is the Regulated Riparian Model Water Code, which has been used as the basis for comprehensive laws in several other states, including New York, Pennsylvania, Maryland, and Georgia.

> Back to Water Resources and Drought
> Back to Water Issues 
> Back to Issues Main Page