An interdisciplinary framework for the protection of karst aquifers

doi:10.1016/j.envsci.2018.07.005

Environmental Science & Policy

Volume 89, November 2018, Pages 41-48

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envsci.2018.07.005 Get rights and content

Highlights

•
Karst (carbonate) aquifers are important resources, susceptible to contamination.
•
Site-specific approaches are needed to characterize these aquifers.
•
Problems arise with lack of specialist evaluation and differences in approaches.
•
Combining knowledge of various domains enhances karst aquifer protection.
•
A proposed framework based on levels of knowledge guides protection strategies.

Abstract

Karst aquifer assessment and management demand site-specific approaches due to their varying character and susceptibility to contamination. This hampers adoption of sustainable protection policies and management practices for these valuable water resources, which currently remain disjointed. Existing methodologies and guidelines can be confusing, and interjurisdictional protection is hampered due to lack of cooperation between involved parties, and differences in legislative systems. By adopting unified procedures and steps, these issues could be solved. Therefore, a new interdisciplinary framework for karst aquifer protection and management is proposed, which can be used regardless of the legislative system, terrain, and hazards. This K-framework provides guidelines for carefully structured cooperation between domains that, are or need to be, involved in karst aquifer protection, e.g. karst scientists, other scientists, policy-making bodies, the public, and various stakeholders. The presented framework is based on levels of knowledge that each of these parties can contribute to the process, and can be used for developing site-specific assessment guidelines for karst aquifers as well as protection policies on the national and international levels. By following the straightforward guidelines provided in this framework, management and protection of karst aquifers can be assured without major changes to existing methodologies and legislative practices.

Introduction

Approximately 75% of European Union (EU) residents depend on groundwater for their water supply (Stevanović et al., 2016; Chen et al., 2017), along with 40% in the United States of America (USA) (Alley et al., 1999). Overall, karst aquifers, flowing through dissolution conduits in carbonate rock, provide 25% of the world’s drinking water (Ford and Williams, 2007). Thus, protection and preservation of these resources is critical for countries worldwide.

Unfortunately, karst aquifers are highly susceptible to contamination and deterioration from overexploitation, lack of self-cleaning mechanisms, and poorly defined watersheds (Gunn, 2007; van Beynen, 2011; Parise, 2014; Stevanović, 2015). Additionally, their character varies between regions, which hampers their evaluation and prevents generalizing of preservation and protection approaches. Therefore, their protection is frequently neglected and/or not fully addressed.

There have been numerous discussions and proposals on how to combine scientific findings related to karst terrains and aquifers with environmental policies in order to assure more comprehensive and coherent protection measures for these resources (van Beynen and Townsend, 2005; Zhou and Beck, 2008; van Beynen, 2011; van Beynen et al., 2012; Krešić, 2013; De Waele et al., 2015; Ravbar and Šebela, 2015). However, karst aquifer preservation through the regulatory system is a complex process in which the involvement of specific domains is frequently ineffective or even neglected. Cooperation can be assured with inclusion of various domains, including scientists, policy-making bodies, stakeholders (e.g. governmental and private environmental agencies), and the public.

The goal of this study is to develop an interdisciplinary framework that enables enhanced management and protection of karst aquifers without substantial changes to existing methodologies and legislative practices. The framework is based on dividing these domains into various levels of knowledge about karst and defining their involvement in the process of karst aquifer protection and management, thereby assuring inclusion and information gathering from all impacted parties.

The framework in this study was created following the “levels of knowledge” approach developed by Bouma (2006) for hydropedology. This was accomplished by analyzing several aspects of existing karst aquifer protection and management. Two domains, policy-making bodies and scientists, and the obstacles that they are facing when trying to implement and shape environmental protection policies, were studied. Then, existing methods for protection of natural resources and, consequently, karst aquifers, in the USA and the EU were analyzed in order to identify both the shortcomings and the positive aspects of existing approaches. Based on these analyses, three important aspects were identified: 1) inclusion of karst scientists and the public; 2) cooperation between various domains and stakeholders; and, 3) exchange of information among these domains. The final step was developing an interdisciplinary framework that would incorporate all of these findings and could assure inclusion of all domains based on their contribution to the process.

Section snippets

The functioning and protection of karst aquifers

Karst aquifers are characterized by heterogenous systems of conduits, fractures and fissures where groundwater follows preferential paths along fractures and bedding planes. Flow paths are mainly developed by dissolution of the rock and are subject to changes, in both time and space. Karst aquifers are also anisiotropic, meaning that their flow path is directionally dependent on the structure of solution openings and fractures which enable groundwater to move horizontally or vertically (

Methods

A framework that incorporates scientific and socio-political aspects was developed by combining analyses of scientific as well as legislative practices regarding karst aquifer protection. The main factors hindering the implementation of coherent protection policies were identified by: (1) analyzing the main obstacles that the two primary domains (policy-making bodies and scientists) face while trying to propose appropriate measures, (2) analyzing the current status of environmental protection

Scientific and policy-making domains and environmental legislation

Various domains and stakeholders have different incentives for dealing with water resources. Scientists develop suggestions and methods for protection measures through studies, research, monitoring, etc., while policy-making bodies, e.g. the political and legislative domains, are generally aiming to assure preservation of these resources through legislative mechanisms. Each domain encounters different issues while pursuing their mandate.

The scientific domain faces (1) lack of background data

A new framework for protection of karst aquifers

The use of interdisciplinary approaches in karst science is emphasized by scientists (White, 1988; Goldscheider, 2012; Parise, 2014; De Waele et al., 2015). Nevertheless, this usually refers to the need of combining various scientific disciplines, e.g. geology, geomorphology, hydrology, biology. However, in order to accurately address the management of karst aquifers the interdisciplinary approach has to extend beyond science to include socio-political domains (van Beynen and Townsend, 2005;

Conclusion

Current laws for karst aquifer protection are unsystematic, and many documents presenting suitable guidelines for karst aquifer management are not legally binding. This discourages both unified data and approaches that could assure comprehensive protection and management. To foster suitable protection, reliable scientific facts, knowledge of social needs, and the processes of policy-making must be combined.

As presented in the K-framework, comprehensive protection policies and management

Acknowledgements

The principal investigator was financially supported by a scholarship of the Slovene Human Resources Development and Scholarship Fund, no. 11012-7/2014-4. The authors thank 2 anonymous reviewers, Mike Ficco and Wil Orndorff for reviews and discussions. Carol Bitting provided photos. Dr. Matt Covington, Dr. Matija Perne, Dr. Van Brahana, Tom Malabad provided very useful discussions regarding the topic. Dr. Luca Zini helped in gathering information regarding karst aquifers in Italy.

Katarina Kosič Ficco has a BS in political science and is a PhD candidate in Karstology. Together, these fields enable her to perform comprehensive research regarding karst aquifers, and development of suitable guidelines for their protection. She is employed by the Virginia Department of Conservation and Recreation, Natural Heritage Program, as a Karst Protection Specialist. She is also the co-editor of the book Karst Water Environment: Advances in Research, Management and Policy which is

References (80)

J. Bouma
Hydropedology as a powerful tool for environmental policy research
Geoderma
(2006)
E.M. De Santo
California dreaming: challenges posed by transposing science-based marine protected area planning processes in different political contexts
Environ. Sci. Policy
(2017)
J. De Waele et al.
Urban waste landfill planning and karstic groundwater resources in developing countries: the example of Lusaka (Zambia)
J. Afr. Earth. Sci.
(2004)
J. De Waele et al.
Karst geomorphology: from hydrological functioning to palaeoenvironmental reconstructions
Geomorphol. Amst. (Amst.)
(2015)
J. Holmes et al.
Enhancing the use of science in environmental policy-making and regulation
Environ. Sci. Policy
(2008)
L.A. North et al.
Interregional comparison of karst disturbance: West-Central Florida and Southeast Italy
J. Environ. Manage.
(2009)
J. Perrin et al.
Epikarst storage in a karst aquifer: a conceptual model based on isotopic data, milandre test site, Switzerland
J. Hydrol.
(2003)
N. Ravbar et al.
The effectiveness of protection policies and legislative framework with special regard to karst landscapes: insights from Slovenia
Environ. Sci. Policy
(2015)
S. Rayner
What Drives Environmental Policy?
Glob. Environ. Change
(2006)
D.P. Robertson et al.
Public ecology: an environmental science and policy for global society
Environ. Sci. Policy
(2003)

C. Wan et al.

A review on political factors influencing public support for urban environmental policy

Environ. Sci. Policy

(2017)

A/RES/63/124

The Law of Transboundary Aquifers

(2009)

B. Ackerman

Private Property and the Constitution

(1978)

W.M. Alley et al.

Sustainability of ground-water resources, U.S. Geological survey circular 1186

US Geol. Surv. Circ.

(1999)

B. Bocchino et al.

) Increasing people`s awarness about the importnace of karst landscapes and aquifers: an experience from Southern italy

V. Brahana et al.

CAFOs on karst—meaningful data collection to adequately define environmental risk, with specific application from the Southern Ozarks of Northern Arkansas

V. Brahana et al.

Geochemical processes and controls affecting water quality of the Karst Area of Big Creek near Mt. Judea, Arkansas

J. Ark. Acad. Sci.

(2016)

40 C.F.R. § 1501 et seq. (2018) National Environmental Policy...

40 C.F.R. §1 et seq. (2018) Protection of...

40 C.F.R. §122 et seq. (2018) National Pollutant Discharge Elimination...

Z. Chen et al.

The world karst aquifer mapping project: concept, mapping procedure and map of Europe

Hydrogeol. J.

(2017)

C. Coble

What’s the difference between laws and regulations?

Find Law

(2015)

J.C. Currens

Changes in groundwater quality in a conduit-flow-Dominated karst aquifer, following BMP implementation

Environ. Geol.

(2002)

D.L. Danielopol et al.

Incorporating ecological perspectives in european groundwater management policy

Environ. Conserv.

(2004)

R.K. Davis et al.

Ground Water in Northwest Arkansas: Minimizing Nutrient Contamination from Non-Point Sources in Karst Terrane

(2000)

DEQ

Review of the Draft Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS) for the Portions of the Mountain Valley Project (MVP) in Virginia; Attachment B: Detailed Comments from Reviewers

(2016)

DEQ

Mountain Valley Pipeline:Review Comments: Request for Additional Information

(2017)

Directive 2011/92/EU

Directive 2011/92/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 13 December 2011 on the Assessment of the Effects of Certain Public and Private Projects on the Environment

(2011)

Directive 2014/52/EU

Directive 2014/52/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 16 April 2014 Amending Directive 2011/92/EU on the Assessment of the Effects of Certain Public and Private Projects on the Environment.

(2014)

Drapen Aden Associates

Plan of Development Mountain Valley Pipeline Project; Apendix L: Karst Mitigation Plan

(2017)

EIONET

Water Framework Directive-River Basin management Plans-2010 Reporting-Italy

(2012)

EIONET

Water Framework Directive-River Basin management Plans-2010 Reporting-Slovenia

(2012)

EPA

Karst: EPA WIPP Fact Sheet No. 6

(2006)

Regulations, Directives and Other Acts

(2017)

European Commission

Groundwater Protection in Europe

(2008)

European Commission

The Water Framework Directive and the Floods Directive: Actions Towards the “Good Status” of EU Water and to Reduce Flood Risks

(2015)

Farm Service Agency United States Department of Agriculture

Environmental Assesment

(2012)

FERC

Mountain Valley Project and Equitrans Expansion Project: Final Environmental Impact Statement

(2017)

M.S. Field

CAFO’s in Karst: How to Investigate Concentrated Animal Feeding Operations in Soluble Rock Terranes for Environmental Protection, October 2012

(2012)

Cited by (14)

Groundwater security indicators and their drivers: An assessment made in a region of tropical climate (Paraopeba River basin, Brazil)
2023, Science of the Total Environment
Groundwater helps overcoming periods of drought buffering their effects on water supply to people, natural ecosystems and the economy. Following the latest Conference of the Parties (COP27), groundwater research gained renewed impulse because the Parties committed themselves to invest on environmental dimensions of water security related with aquifer characterization and protection. In that context, the purpose of this study was to help providing an integrated assessment to some fundamental issues about groundwater security, summarized as the three “how”s: how much, how ready and for how long can groundwater be delivered from watersheds? A complementary goal was to identify and quantify the role of watershed characteristics controlling these “how”s. The methodology combined hydrologic modeling and GIS and the results for the test site (Paraopeba River basin, Brazil) were: (1) the studied river tributaries mostly drain regolith aquifers with short hydrologic turnover times (1.3–23.7 yr) and small aquifer mobile storages (0.1–1.3 m), but high specific yields (0.2–8.2 m/yr), being generally prone to hydrologic droughts; (2) the specific discharge is primarily elevation controlled (via precipitation increases with altitude), but relates positively with drainage density as well; (3) the mobile storage in the Quadrilátero-Ferrífero mountain is larger than elsewhere, being influenced by a local geomorphologic setting (higher coverage with concave hillslopes); (4) the groundwater contribution to streamflow discharge is high (> 50 %, on average), being improved with the coverage of argisols; (5) vulnerability to droughts could be alleviated through expansion of water-retention infrastructure in specific regions, as well as through land use conversions targeting reduced evapotranspiration or sustainable land management of argisol and concave surface landscapes. Although applied to a specific catchment, our results stand on a site-independent methodological framework. Thus, the understanding about groundwater security gained with this study can be inspiring to other workers dealing with tropical climate landscapes.
The COP27 screened through the lens of global water security
2023, Science of the Total Environment
Water security is an expression of resilience. In the recent past, scientists and public organizations have built considerable work around this concept launched in 2013 by the United Nations as “the capacity of a population to safeguard sustainable access to adequate quantities of acceptable quality water for sustaining livelihoods, human well-being, and socio-economic development, for ensuring protection against water-borne pollution and water-related disasters, and for preserving ecosystems in a climate of peace and political stability”. In the 27th Conference of the Parties (COP27), held in Sharm El-Sheikh (Egypt) in last November, water security was considered a priority in the climate agenda, especially in the adaption and loss and damage axes. This discussion paper represents the authors' opinion about how the conference coped with water security and what challenges remain to attend. As discussion paper, it had the purpose to stimulate further discussion in a broader scientific forum.
Contaminant transport from stormwater management areas to a freshwater karst spring in Florida: Results of near-surface geophysical investigations and tracer experiments
2022, Journal of Hydrology: Regional Studies
Citation Excerpt :
Karst aquifers are important resources of fresh water characterized by specific geologic and hydrogeologic conditions (Ford and Williams, 2013; Ficco and Sasowsky, 2018; Goldscheider et al., 2020).
Silver Springs is a karst spring in north-central Florida. As landuses in the springshed have urbanized in recent decades, concentrations of contaminants, including nitrate, have increased in spring water, causing environmental concerns.
Pathways of groundwater movement from stormwater management areas to Silver Springs were investigated using ground-based geophysical surveys (ground penetrating radar and frequency domain electromagnetics) accompanied by tracer tests in the Upper Floridan Aquifer (UFA) and surficial aquifer. Results indicated heterogeneous near-surface and deep karst conditions, where stormwater runoff may be transported quickly through groundwater to the spring. A wide range of groundwater velocities (10⁻⁶ to 10⁻³ ms⁻¹) were observed in the surficial aquifer, where faster flow speeds were associated with subsurface anomalies and preferential flow. However, tracer injected into the UFA was observed in the spring hours later, suggesting possible maximum groundwater velocities on the order of 10⁻¹ ms⁻¹ in the karst aquifer. Series of tracer pulses in the spring highlight the complexity of flow pathways to Silver Springs.
The rapid transport of tracer from stormwater basins to Silver Springs suggests that stormwater infiltration basins may be hotspots for potential aquifer and spring contamination in karst areas. Development of stormwater best management practices (BMPs) that integrate heterogeneous karst transport processes may enhance spring and groundwater quality in Silver Springs and other karst regions.
Sustainability of Groundwater
2022, Imperiled: The Encyclopedia of Conservation: Volume 1-3
Groundwater fills and flows in the pore-space, fractures, and conduits of geological formations beneath the Earth’s surface, called aquifers. Groundwater is the Earth’s largest non-frozen freshwater reservoir, accounting for more than 97% of the liquid freshwater stock. Groundwater is the world’s most extracted natural resource with withdrawal rates in the range of 1000 km³/year, and about 70% of the pumped groundwater is used for agriculture worldwide. Groundwater is a reliable freshwater resource that moves slowly in the aquifer, providing vital benefits for billions of people worldwide. Groundwater supplies more than half of the drinking water; helps to grow food by supplying approximately 40% of irrigation water; accounts for about one third of freshwater supply for industrial activities; and supports groundwater dependent ecosystems in aquifers, soil, rivers, lakes, wetlands, coastal zones, and marine environments, providing numerous ecosystem services. In addition, groundwater is a geothermal energy resource, which can be used for heating and cooling in urban heat islands as an example. Moreover, groundwater can generally serve as a manageable buffer to droughts, surface water seasonal variations, and floods. However, there are growing concerns over unsustainable groundwater pumping exceeding natural and induced recharge along with groundwater contamination and salinization, and degradation of groundwater dependent ecosystems. For example, more than half of the largest aquifers on Earth are being depleted, given estimates derived from the GRACE satellite mission (Richey et al., 2015). In addition, sustainable management of groundwater resources is critical for climate adaptation strategies, as climate change and variability drive the aquifer recharge, and can change groundwater use. As the world population is nearing 8 billion, these essential benefits and growing concerns call for an action to ensure groundwater sustainability (Gleeson et al., 2019). This article shows that understanding the coupled water-ecology-human system in a participatory water governance framework is critical for sustainable groundwater management. In addition, the article discusses the sustainability challenges of coastal and karst aquifers as examples.
Changes in urban land use throughout the Edwards Aquifer: A comparative analysis of Austin, San Antonio, and the Interstate–35 corridor
2021, Applied Geography
Citation Excerpt :
The findings of this study suggest that the conservation easements, fee-simple land acquisitions, funding mechanisms (e.g., city bonds, sales taxes), and organizational structures (e.g., SAWS, EAA, EAPP, WQPL) implemented across the Edwards Aquifer have overcome many of these barriers to successfully protect large swaths of environmentally sensitive lands. In fact, the overall approach adopted in the Edwards Aquifer region incorporates several of the steps and procedures outlined in the framework for effective karst aquifer protection and management proposed by Ficco and Sasowsky (2018) and thus provides a potential exemplar for aquifer conservation in other geologically similar regions. Future research will help provide additional insights into aquifer urbanization trends and the effectiveness of aquifer protection policies.
Due to the vulnerability of the Edwards Aquifer to urban development, policy measures have been implemented to protect the important water resource in South–Central Texas. This paper analyzed land use change trends across different portions of the Edwards Aquifer to better understand the degree to which protective measures influenced aquifer urbanization rates. Specifically, the National Land Cover Database was used to quantify urban development within the contributing and recharge zones of the Edwards Aquifer across Bexar, Travis, Williamson, Comal, and Hays counties for three time periods: 2001–2006, 2006–2011, and 2011–2016. Bexar County exhibited the greatest reduction in the rate of urbanization within the recharge zone although the percentage of the zone developed remained the highest. Conversely, the pace of recharge zone development in Travis and Williamson County decreased less rapidly, but the percentage of the zone urbanized was lower. Limited urban development was observed across the aquifer in Comal and Hays County during the study period. Overall, the consistent declining rate of urbanization throughout the sensitive Edwards Aquifer recharge zone suggests that the policies protecting the aquifer were largely effective, particularly given the rapid pace of urban growth throughout the region.
Underground exploration beyond state reach: Alternative volumetric territorial projects in Venezuela, Cuba, and Mexico
2020, Political Geography
Citation Excerpt :
Part of our argument is that regulatory legalistic framings may be all inclusive of the underground, but when confronted with the heterogeneity of undergrounds, the capacity to apply such framings can be compromised. Indeed, even when the existence and particular qualities and vulnerabilities of karst are acknowledged, policies addressing its management are extremely complex, with different forms around the world, and typically only succeed when the site-specific characteristics of karst are attended to (Kosič Ficco & Sasowsky, 2018). And not unlike karst itself, which in the scientific literature is increasingly characterized as “transboundary” dynamic phenomena, the boundaries between cave explorers and karst scientists are porous, fluid, and dynamic (Stevanovic, Krešić, and Kukuric 2016).
Geographic analyses have centered on how state and capitalist enterprises—often in collaboration with each other—deploy volumetric territorial strategies and processes to achieve their ends, i.e., control in the form of securitization or resource extraction. We invite an exploration of different ways voluminous environments, their flows, and ecosystems can be experienced and represented with analyses of diverse activities of cave explorers in Venezuela, Cuba, and Mexico. These activities call attention to the heterogeneity of volumetric territorial projects. By exploring and mapping subterranean spaces, cavers co-opt some of the techniques of the state and/or capitalist territorialization and commodification. But the experiences of underground exploration and even mapping exceed and sometimes contradict the motivations and effects rightfully associated with these volumetric practices. Not only are these activities deeply affective and embodied, they typically happen beyond state reach. Moreover, following cavers' explorations requires more open conceptions of both territory and voluminous spaces, and the ecological rhythms and flows that constitute them. Doing so leads to the recognition of how cavers experience and enact alternative volumetric territorial projects. In the process, some of these projects forge defiant national imaginaries, literally from below. The possibility and potential of these imaginaries come from the unique quality of subterranean exploration: only those who explore and survey passages underground know their location, extent, and at times, their content. Yet, there are dangers as well: not only are most of these projects far from emancipatory or inclusionary, they can be co-opted by state and/or capitalist enterprises. The implications of this last point are complex and potentially contradictory: while state knowledge and control of caves and karst environments may limit caver access and activities, lack of state knowledge and control may also result in these environments and their contents’ lack of protection.

View all citing articles on Scopus

Dr. Ira D. Sasowsky is Professor of Geosciences and Director of the Center for Environmental Studies at the University of Akron, Ohio, USA. He and his students conduct geological, hydrological and geochemical research that examines the rates and patterns of karst development from locations cross the world. A particular focus is the Appalachian karst belt in Virginia and West Virginia. Here, using numerous cave-specific studies, they are assembling a history of landscape evolution going back more than a million years.

View full text

An interdisciplinary framework for the protection of karst aquifers

Highlights

Abstract

Introduction

Section snippets

The functioning and protection of karst aquifers

Methods

Scientific and policy-making domains and environmental legislation

A new framework for protection of karst aquifers

Conclusion

Acknowledgements

Geoderma

Environ. Sci. Policy

J. Afr. Earth. Sci.

Geomorphol. Amst. (Amst.)

Environ. Sci. Policy

J. Environ. Manage.

J. Hydrol.

Environ. Sci. Policy

Glob. Environ. Change

Environ. Sci. Policy

Environ. Sci. Policy

The Law of Transboundary Aquifers

Private Property and the Constitution

Sustainability of ground-water resources, U.S. Geological survey circular 1186

US Geol. Surv. Circ.

) Increasing people`s awarness about the importnace of karst landscapes and aquifers: an experience from Southern italy

CAFOs on karst—meaningful data collection to adequately define environmental risk, with specific application from the Southern Ozarks of Northern Arkansas

Geochemical processes and controls affecting water quality of the Karst Area of Big Creek near Mt. Judea, Arkansas

J. Ark. Acad. Sci.

The world karst aquifer mapping project: concept, mapping procedure and map of Europe

Hydrogeol. J.

What’s the difference between laws and regulations?

Find Law

Changes in groundwater quality in a conduit-flow-Dominated karst aquifer, following BMP implementation

Environ. Geol.

Incorporating ecological perspectives in european groundwater management policy

Environ. Conserv.

Ground Water in Northwest Arkansas: Minimizing Nutrient Contamination from Non-Point Sources in Karst Terrane

Review of the Draft Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS) for the Portions of the Mountain Valley Project (MVP) in Virginia; Attachment B: Detailed Comments from Reviewers

Mountain Valley Pipeline:Review Comments: Request for Additional Information

Directive 2011/92/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 13 December 2011 on the Assessment of the Effects of Certain Public and Private Projects on the Environment

Directive 2014/52/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 16 April 2014 Amending Directive 2011/92/EU on the Assessment of the Effects of Certain Public and Private Projects on the Environment.

Plan of Development Mountain Valley Pipeline Project; Apendix L: Karst Mitigation Plan

Water Framework Directive-River Basin management Plans-2010 Reporting-Italy

Water Framework Directive-River Basin management Plans-2010 Reporting-Slovenia

Karst: EPA WIPP Fact Sheet No. 6

Regulations, Directives and Other Acts

Groundwater Protection in Europe

The Water Framework Directive and the Floods Directive: Actions Towards the “Good Status” of EU Water and to Reduce Flood Risks

Environmental Assesment

Mountain Valley Project and Equitrans Expansion Project: Final Environmental Impact Statement

CAFO’s in Karst: How to Investigate Concentrated Animal Feeding Operations in Soluble Rock Terranes for Environmental Protection, October 2012