By Gary Johnson, Jane Dee Hull and Judy Martz Western Governors
It is only early June, and already this year's drought has led to crop and pasture losses, drinking water supply shortages, wildfires across the West and dust storms in Montana.
Although drought visits some part of the country every year, there still does not exist a permanent national policy to prepare for and respond to drought disasters. This lack of a coordinated, integrated federal drought policy causes confusion at the state and local levels and results in actions being taken mainly through special legislation and ad hoc measures rather than through a systematic and permanent process, as occurs with other natural disasters.
The National Drought Mitigation Center dubs the current approach to drought as the "hydro-illogical cycle." This cycle is characterized by the way we ignore water shortages until the situation becomes dire. We then yell for help and beg Congress for emergency funding. But as soon as it rains, we forget that there was ever a problem and the cycle starts all over again.
The governors believe there is a better way to do business. We advocate a comprehensive national policy that statutorily authorizes a lead federal agency for drought, and delineates the roles and responsibilities for coordinating and integrating federal assistance for droughts. We believe that drought preparedness planning should be encouraged and funded at all levels to anticipate future droughts. As droughts emerge, federal and state funding needs to focus on the implementation of the preparedness plans in order to mitigate the drought's impacts.
For example, if it is a basin highly dependent on agriculture, the preparedness plan might contemplate the planting of alternative crops that require less water. As a drought emerges, federal, state, and local governments might then work with the farmers to enable the planting of the drought resistant crops, and advise implement and seed dealers to stock their inventories accordingly.
If there is a known endangered species that could become threatened, the plan might also ensure adequate stream levels through water transfers, water banking, the buying of temporary water rights from willing sellers, or other such tools. We believe that investing our public resources in such preparedness activities will result in greater efficiencies, more win-win solutions that "share the shortage," and less overall impact from drought.
The May 28 National Drought Monitor reported that 40 percent of the mainland United States is in a "moderate" or worse drought. Portions of 25 states (13 in the West and 12 in the East) are in a "severe" to "extreme" drought. And parts of Arizona, Colorado, Montana, New Mexico and Utah are now in an "exceptional" drought, which is as bad as it gets.
Historically, the NDMC reports that about 18 percent of the nation experiences drought each year. In the 100-year period between 1896 and 1995, "severe" or "extreme" drought was recorded somewhere in the country every single year, and in 10-25 percent of the country in 72 of those years.
The costs of drought can be great and are exacerbated by the lack of a coordinated federal policy. According to the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), there have been 12 different drought events since 1980 that resulted in damages and costs exceeding $1 billion each. The most devastating of these was the 1988 drought in the central and eastern U.S. which caused severe losses to agriculture and related industries totaling $40 billion and an estimated 5,000-10,000 deaths.
In the 1996 report by the Western Governors' Association, Drought Response Action Plan, the governors recommend developing "a national drought policy or framework that integrates actions and responsibilities among all levels of government." This recommendation has been repeated in a number of reports since, most recently in the congressionally mandated report by the National Drought Policy Commission issued in 2000, Preparing for Drought in the 21st Century.
Congress is now poised to act on these recommendations. The "National Drought Preparedness Act of 2002" is awaiting committee action in both the U.S. Senate and House. It has broad-based bipartisan support. Sponsors of the bills are Sens. Pete Domenici, R-N.M., and Max Baucus, D-Mont., and Reps. Alcee Hastings, D-Fla., and Dennis Rehberg, R-Mont.
This legislation was developed with the input and support of the Western Governors' Association, the Southern Governors' Association, the National Governors' Association, and a number of other state and local organizations impacted by drought. The effect of the bill would be to put in place a comprehensive national drought policy.
It would move the country away from the costly, ad hoc response-oriented approach to drought, and move us toward a proactive, preparedness approach, similar to what we have for other natural disasters such as hurricanes, floods, and tornadoes.
On behalf of the Western Governors' Association, we commend these senators and representatives for introducing this legislation, and call on Congress and the president to enact it this year. It is high time for this nation to move to a national policy for drought that recognizes and prepares for the always possible threat presented by drought, and which encourages and facilitates the implementation of measures that will mitigate droughts' impacts.
Arizona Gov. Jane Dee Hull is the chairman of the Western Governors' Association. Montana Gov. Judy Martz is the vice chairman, and serves together with New Mexico Gov. Gary Johnson as the WGA co-lead governors for drought.
opinion 
...go to bookmarks
E-mail Story
Print Friendly
