The Conundrum of Non-Point Pollution

Jeffrey Levinton demonstrates the prominent roles point source pollution and non-point pollution play in contaminating the Hudson River. Point source pollutants are the manufactured nutrients, sewage solids, and toxic waste that emanate from particular manmade structures on the Hudson River, such as publicly owned sewage facilities and industrial complexes. These manmade facilities release pollutants directly into the Hudson River, and, as a result, federal legislators easily pass laws that regulate point source pollution; point source pollution is thus somewhat preventable because environmentalists and politicians know exactly where the pollutants come from. Unlike point source pollution, non-point pollution comes from many different sources. Non-point pollutants include fertilizers and insecticides from farms, oil and toxins from industrial waste, sediment from construction sites, acid runoff from old mines, atmospheric deposition, and even bacteria and nutrients from livestock and humans. These natural and man-made pollutants are naturally dispersed by water runoff from rain and snowmelt. The ground then absorbs the polluted runoff, which contaminates groundwater and the river estuary. The EPA condemns non-point pollutants as the leading contaminant of human drinking water, and estimates that non-point pollution also has an extremely detrimental effect on the Hudson River Estuary’s wildlife, specifically the region’s fisheries.
However, the main problem with non-point pollution is that we all contribute to it regardless of our respective levels of environmental consciousness; humans release non-point pollutants into the ecosystem by simply going to the bathroom. The unchecked, widespread production of non-point pollutants is not the only reason this form of pollution is so dangerous to our environment. The term “non-point pollution” implies pollutants are dispersed in random locations by natural forces, which makes it is almost impossible for politicians to enact effective legislation against non-point pollution. Legal regulation of non-point pollution is difficult to enforce because politicians have no distinguishable producer/polluter to blame. Additionally, one must question whether non-point pollution should be handled by state or federal legislation. The 1972 Clean Water Act, which was passed by the federal government, offers some protection against non-point pollution because it requires regular testing of the Hudson River’s toxicity levels, but it does nothing to curb the process of non-point pollution.
The shortcomings of the Clean Water Act in regards to non-point pollution come as no surprise because federal legislation is not the correct means of action against non-point pollution. Rather, local action is necessary if we want to stop this destructive form of pollution. State level politics is vital to this fight, and town councils also have a significant role to play. The Hudson Valley needs stricter building laws that mandate “greener” construction sites, restrictions on pesticide use, detoxification of abandoned mines, and limitations on urban sprawl, which would decrease runoff following inclement weather. Yet, local politics can only go so far. Like other environmental movements, curbing non-point pollution in the Hudson River Valley rests in the hands of local communities. If farmers want to see environmental change, they will re-evaluate their use of pesticides. Similarly, residents further downstate will fight against suburban sprawl if they wish to decrease the amount of toxic runoff that reaches the river, as well as pollutes local reservoirs. The Hudson River depends on us to stop denying our responsibilities to our environment and to one another.