Ground Water Ethics

Abstract

In 1949, Aldo Leopold’s son, Luna, published his father’s book A Sand County Almanac (Oxford University Press, New York) following Aldo’s untimely death the preceding year. The final section of the book introduces “The Land Ethic,” a concept that became the cornerstone of environmental ethics. “The Land Ethic” extends the concept of community to include not only humans but also animals and plants as well as the inanimate components of the environment such as soil, rocks, and water. Leopold collectively refers to animals, plants, soil, rocks, and water as “land” and states that the land has a “right to continued existence in a natural state” in at least some places. In ground water management, we talk about ethical use of water and define limits to use with concepts such as safe yield and sustainability. But even under the most enlightened circumstances, ground water management is pursued with a human-centric viewpoint. For example, we might favor sustainable development of ground water to preserve the resource for future generations of humans and to avoid inconvenient adverse effects such as land subsidence, sea water intrusion, degradation of water quality, or esthetically unpleasant effects such as loss of springs and habitat for animals and plants that give us pleasure. Sustainable use is also linked to economics. However, in the philosophical context used by Leopold, an ethic places “a limitation on freedom of action in the struggle for existence.” Leopold gave this advice: “Examine each question in terms of what is ethically and esthetically right, as well as what is economically expedient. A thing is right when it tends to preserve the integrity, stability, and beauty of the biotic community. It is wrong when it tends otherwise.” If strictly followed, this directive would place severe limitations on decision making in many ground water management scenarios. In fact, the whole ground water industry runs counter to the concept of ethics, as defined by Leopold, since we aim to develop ground water resources for beneficial use by humans. For example, the thesis in Water and Ethics: Use of Groundwater (Lamas 2004, New York: UNESCO, p. 33) is that intensive use of ground water is beneficial and ethical if development is “well designed and controlled.” Aldo Leopold, like Henry Thoreau, exhibited tendencies toward mysticism. Leopold talked about “goose music” and Thoreau wondered who might hear the fishes when they cry. While Leopold probably did not believe that inanimate objects such as rocks and water have spirits (as in Shinto and the beliefs of Native Americans), he certainly recognized a vital force in nature (Nash, R., 1977, Do rocks have rights? The Center Magazine, November/December: 2–12). Most people acknowledge that respect for oneself, for family, for “tribe,” for race or ethnic heritage, and for nation imposes limitations on personal freedom; in civilized societies, codified bodies of laws enforce these limitations. Furthermore, most people will recognize that respect for life, with accompanying limitations on freedom, ought to be extended to all humankind and could be extended at least to animals. On the other hand, if humans are to survive and thrive, we must necessarily consume plants, if not animals, and utilize water. Yet, Leopold believed that ethics might eventually evolve to the stage where humans would recognize “the land” (i.e., plants, animals, soil, rocks, and water) as part of our community. Extending this idea even further, and speaking philosophically, humans can impart “rights” to inanimate objects, rights that they obviously cannot claim for themselves (Nash 1977). Given the realities of the global struggle for existence, it is unrealistic at this point in time to advocate water resources management based solely on a ground water ethic derived from Leopold’s Land Ethic. Leopold was enough of a realist to appreciate “The Land Ethic” was a concept before its time, and he compromised by recommending that ethics be considered along with economics and esthetics. Nevertheless, today we preserve places where ground water exists in a natural state, even if our motivation is based in esthetics. For example, spectacular displays of ground water discharge (geysers) are protected in Yellowstone National Park, and in many places even minor springs are protected locally. Maybe in another 100 years, with additional technological and engineering advances, our notion of ethics will have evolved so that a true ground water ethic, as envisioned by Leopold, will emerge in some form as a basis for making management decisions.