Quote:
Originally Posted by Biggd
We spend more money on studies than we do on remediation. Then, when we finally decide to do something, the price has gone up so much that we can't get the funding.
|
This might be true in some cases but there are recent examples where the process worked. For example, in the M'boro Bay sub-watershed, about $40K was spent on the study - which identified the problem spots and over 40 projects that would reduce phosphorus level. Over the past eight years, the town DPW has used that plan to get grants and work through the project list. In another case, about $70K was spent studying the cyano problem in Kanasatka which resulted in over $500,000K spent on remediation. The common thread here is the Lake Winnipesaukee Association. They are good at making plans and even better at using the plans to obtain grants for projects. No plan, no grant - so money needs to be spent on studies. The trick is rapid follow-up.