Bedford Audubon Society

From the five boroughs of New York to distant Putnam County, a coalition of grassroots organizations that include community, housing, environmental, and religious groups is expressing incredulity over the New York City Department of Environmental Protection's (DEP) recently released "scientific" study which purports to justify a chemical treatment filtration plant for water from the Croton watershed.

The DEP is encountering stiff resistance from a variety of groups which contend that the "scientific" study is nothing more than a retread of DEP's old, discredited arguments to prop up its feeble case for filtration.

The groups are particularly opposed to DEP's attempt at siting a chemical treatment filtration plant at Mosholu Golf Course in Van Cortlandt Park in The Bronx, the DEP's preferred site over two others, one located at the Harlem River in The Bronx, and the other at Eastview in Westchester County.

Although building the plant at the Mosholu site requires park alienation, it would cost considerably less than the other two sites. To make park alienation palatable, the City is offering $243 million as the "carrot" in the form of an "amenities" package for The Bronx park's improvements. Only $43 million would be set aside for Van Cortlandt Park, a prospect that Assemblyman Jeffrey Dinowitz observed at the May 23 hearing would result in "Van Cortlandt bearing 100% of the damages while standing to reap only 20% of the benefits."

The groups contend that the DEP is WRONG on diverting dedicated funds for water-related projects to park use and WRONG on filtration. "We are being asked by DEP to takes its word that the need to construct a chemical treatment/filtration plant for Croton water is based on hard science. It is 'not,' notes Marian Rose, a physics Ph.D. and president of Croton Watershed Clean Water Coalition (CWCWC). "General statements that are neither referenced anywhere in the text nor upheld by supporting evidence violate the basic tenets of science. This DEP study would never qualify as a 'scientific' study. It is irresponsible of the DEP to rest a momentous decision affecting the 9 million New Yorkers who drink New York City water on such flimsy evidence."

Don Carlson, Conservation Chair of the Sierra Club Atlantic Chapter, adds, "The DEP continues to use salesmanship rather than substance to convince the public that a $1.5 billion filtration boondoggle is necessary. But we do not need to have that money tacked onto our water bills."

David Ferguson, representing The HDFC (Housing Development Fund Cooperatives) Council, says: "We're not against filtration when it's needed. For example, I would never drink water from the Mississippi River were it not filtered. But Croton water is different. It is high quality and fulfills all state and federal health standards. Strong enforcement of reservoir protection will be a better guarantee of safe water than a chemical treatment/filtration plant."

Ken Baer, Chair of the Sierra Club Atlantic Chapter, states: "New York City has committed a scant $13.5 million for land acquisition in the Croton Watershed that it may not have entirely spent, compared to the $250 million committed to the Catskill/Delaware system. This is not a serious investment in protecting the Croton Watershed."

Fay Muir of Bronx Community Action states: "The Croton Watershed has remarkable properties - an abundance of wetlands, forests, small lakes, and ponds, that filter out pollutants and keep the water clean - even with the development that's occurring in the watershed. Protect those resources, and we'll have clean water for the foreseeable future."

Ann Fanizzi, Chair of the Putnam County Coalition to Preserve Open Space, adds: "DEP promises to protect the Croton Watershed even after filtration. If DEP's present lack of commitment is any indication of the future, we shall end up with sprawl development in Putnam County and less good drinking water for Croton consumers at a higher cost."

Croton Watershed Clean Water Coalition (CWCWC), of Bedford, New York, is preparing a peer-reviewed study of chlorine dioxide treatment as an alternative to filtration which, if accepted, could save the City over a billion dollars. Many conservation groups support the testing of chlorine dioxide. Unfortunately, the DEP has continued to rely on a flawed study of alternatives prepared over five years ago - a computer study not based on verified data or actual test, that was criticized by their own consultants.

It is time for New York City and State agencies to be accountable to the public that supports them. They should exercise due diligence before spending the public's tax dollars. They should continue to investigate alternatives that could save the City billions of dollars. And the Assembly and the City Council should think twice before approving this plan of taking away park land for what is, in reality, an industrial facility. Groups questioning the validity of this DEP study include Bedford Audubon Society, Bronx Community Coalition, Catskill Heritage Alliance, Chelsea Reform Democratic Club, Citizens of Equal Environmental Protection (CEEP), Croton Watershed Clean Water Coalition (CWCWC), Diocesan Missionary & Church Extension Society, Episcopal Diocese of New York, Federated Conservationists of Westchester County (FCWC), Hand Across the Border (HAB), The HDFC (Housing
Development Fund Cooperatives) Council, NYC Friends of Clearwater, Putnam County Coalition to Preserve Open Space, Queens Civic Congress, Sierra Club, Southern Yorktown Homeowners Association, Town of New Paltz, Trout Unlimited, Westchester Land trust, Westchester Trails, and Yorktown Land Trust.