Table 2.1: Water Use in Kansas, 1990 and 2005.(Data Source: Kenney, J.F., et al. 2009, Solley, W.B., et al. 1993)(Data Source: Kenney, J.F., et al. 2009)

Water Use in Kansas Kelsey Yocum, Kyle Nicholas 41-301 Water Resources Management

Introduction

This poster shows the water uses, availability, and case study for the state of Kansas. It gives a good over view of where the major water sources in Kansas are located and how they have impacted the state. This poster also compares the differences and kinds of water availability in 2005 and 1990. It explains how much irrigation can impact a water supply. It also gives a good idea of how much water we rely on for daily practices. Our case study discuses one of the states major controversy's of fluorinated water. We discuss the impacts it can have on a water supply and some of the benefits that also come along with it.

Water Use in Kansas

The population of Kansas relies heavily on water for farming. From 1990 to 2005 the state of Kansas’s biggest water use had been Irrigation and Livestock. The lowest water use was Industrial and mining throughout both years. The western parts of Kansas occupy most of the farming in the state. Kansas was ranked the 27th highest use for water in 1990. In 2005 Kansas ranked the 34th highest states for water use. The total water use has decreased about 38% (USGS). Although the total water use has decreased over the years, water levels have gone down due to environmental impacts. They have lowered due to decreases in water infiltration and ground water mining from aquifers.

The changes in water use result from the changes in population, growth of wind farms and agricultural departments. From 1990- 2005 the population increased by 185,042 people (USGS). This number means a lot in per capita use. Think of the volume of water five people could obtain compared to thousands. This population increase affected public supply (domestic and commercial) for the most part. In 1990 public supply was only 1% out of total water withdrawals in Kansas (USGS). In 2005 the public supply went up to 11% of total water withdrawals (USGS). In the western parts of the state (which contains large areas of cattle farms) a rapid growth of wind farms occurred as a result of a green movement. The state realized that it was a lot cleaner than burning coal. Another side of their green movement resulted in agricultural departments taking precautionary principles. Some examples are increases in: no-till farming, water permits, and property rights. No-till farming of alfalfa hay increased water infiltration for many parts of the state. Water permits limit the amount of water that can be withdrawn from ground and surface water. Overall the water use in 2005 decreased by 2,290mgpd (USGS). As long as Kansas continues to take precautionary principles they should continue to see better changes in the years to come. Climate and Hydrology

In western Kansas the climate becomes much drier. Its annual evaporation varies due to changes in weather patterns.[ K]ansas receives 60 to 70 inches of evaporation in the south west while in central Kansas there is 50 to 60 inches. Once you move northeast there is only forty to fifty inches per year of evaporation. The western part of the state receives sixteen inches of rain annually. The eastern part of the state receives twice the amount; at thirty-two inches per year. Runoff occurs more often in the southeast at 20 inches per year versus 0.2 inches in the west( USGS). The 100th meridian divides the great difference in precipitation from the arid west from the humid east in the United States. The western part of Kansas in considered semi-arid. This means this part of the state is mostly dry receiving small amounts of precipitation. It does not receive as much rain as eastern Kansas because it is further from the Gulf of Mexico. (Figure 1.1) below shows the annual average precipitation of Kansas. Most of the water is returned to the atmosphere through evapotranspiration.

There are three major rivers commonly known in Kansas; they are: The Arkansas River, The Missouri River and the Kansas River. The Arkansas River runs through four states while the Missouri River runs through ten. The Missouri river runs into the Kansas River. The Kansas River runs for 171 miles(USGS). The Arkansas River runs parallel to the Kansas River. The figure (1.2) shows where these rivers are located in Kansas. The Tuttle Creek , Cheney Creek and Waconda Lake make up the major lakes in Kansas. Tuttle Creek and Cheney Creek are manmade reservoirs while Lake Waconda is a reservoir(USGS)

There are two major River basins in Kansas and one major aquifer. The two river basins are the Missouri River Basin and the Arkansas River Basin. Another river basin in Kansas is the Solomon River Basin(USGS). (Figure 1.3) to the right shows the Solomon River Basin. The major Aquifer in Kansas is the High Planes Aquifer, also known as the Ogallala aquifer. The High Plains Aquifer is an example of an unconfined aquifer. (see figure 1.5) It covers parts of Nebraska, Kansas, Colorado, Oklahoma, Texas and South Dakota. A few years ago the Solomon river Basin was being depleted of water from water mining of the Ogallala aquifer. Today water coming out of the basins is better monitored. More water management systems continue to spread across Kansas today(USGS).

Case Study: Fluorinated water in Wichita, Kansas

References

Cech, Thomas. 2005.Principles of Water Resources: history, Development, Management, and Policy. 2nd. Kansas Facts Maps and State Symbols. Photograph.

Center for Disease Control, 2008,CDC Reports on Fluoridation. Photograph

Fredeen, Charles. 2002. Kansas. Lerner Publications Company,. 13-14.

"GROUND WATER ATLAS of the UNITED STATES." USGS. usgs.gov, n.d. retrieved September 20, 2011. from <http://pubs.usgs.gov/ha/ha730/ch_d/D-text.html>.

John Colquhoun,1997, Perspectives in Biology and Medicine, 41, 1, Autumn 1997. Photograph

Kansas Geological Survey, 2005. "Groundwater Occurences." KGS-Kansas Groundwater Use. retrieved Sep 20, 2011. from <http://www.kgs.ku.edu/Publications/Bulletins/ED10/04_occur.html>.

KDA, 2006. "Solomon River Basin." Kansas Department of Agriculture. retrieved. November 21 2011. from <http://www.ksda.gov/subbasin/content/202>.

Kenny, J.F., Barber, N.L., Hutson, S.S., Linsey, K.S., Lovelace, J.K., and Maupin, M.A. (2009) Estimated use of water in the United States in 2005. U.S. Geological Survey Circular 134. Retrieved November 20, 2011, from <http://pubs.usgs.gov/circ/1344/>

Kohler et al. 1959. "Mean Annual Lake Evaporation, 1946-1955." Infographic. First Dunne and Lepld. Retrieved October 20.2011. from <http://www.unl.edu/nac/atlas/Map_Html/Climate/National/Mean_Annual_Lake_Evaporation/ET.htm>.

KSDA Basin Management Team. 2006. Solomon River Basin. Photograph. Kansas Department of Agriculture, Topeka.

Mann, Fred. 2011 "National Dental-health Coalition Urges Water Fluoridation” retrieved November 18, 2011. from <http://www.kansas.com/2011/11/16/2104545/national-dental-health-coalition.html>.

Maps.com. 2010. "Kansas Average Annual Precipitation Map." Infographic. retrieved September 20, 2011. from <http://www.maps.com/ref_map.aspx?cid=680,692,762,1122&pid=11807>.

Mullen, Joe. 2005 "History of Water Fluoridation : Article : British Dental Journal." Nature Publishing Group : Science Journals, Jobs, and Information. Retrieved November 18, 2011. from <http://www.nature.com/bdj/journal/v199/n7s/full/4812863a.html>.

Oliver, John. 2004. Encyclopedia of World Climatology. Springer, 167.

Opie, John. 2000.Ogallala: Water for a Dry Land. Second. The University of Nebraska Press,

Seldon, Roberta. "Water Fluoridation Urged by National Dental Health Coalition Page 2 | ThirdAge." Baby Boomer Health, Aging & Retirement | Midlife Caregiving & Relationships | ThirdAge. November 18, 2011. Web. November 19, 2011. <http://www.thirdage.com/news/water-fluoridation-urged-by-national-dental-health-coalition_11-16-2011?page=1>.

Solley, W. B., Pierce, R. R., and Perlman, H. A. 1993. Estimated Use of Water in the United States in 1990. U. S. Geological Survey Circular 1081. Retrieved October 17, 2006, from <http://water.usgs.gov/watuse/wucircular2.html>Stewart, Bobby, et all. 2003. Encyclopedia of Water Science. New York: Marcel Dekker Inc., 43-44.

United States Geological Survey. 2011. high Plains Regional Ground-Water Study. Retrieved October 17, 2011, From <http://co.water.usgs.gov/nawqa/hpgw/factsheets/DENNEHYFS1.html>.

United States Geological Suvery.2011. High Plains Regional Ground Water Study. Photograph. USGS

Figure 2.2: Withdrawl water use in Kansas by category, 1990 and 2005(Data Source: Kenney, J.F., et al. 2009, Solley, W.B., et al. 1993)

Figure 2.1: Withdrawl water use in Kansas by category, 2005(Data Source: Kenney, J.F., et al. 2009)

1990

2005

  1990 2005 % ChangePopulationPer capita water use(gpd)Land area (mi2)Water use per mi2 of land (gpd)

2,478,0002,460

82,27774,077

2,740,0001,382

82,27746,027

10%-44%

--38%

Total Withdrawls (mgpd)Public Supply, Domestic & CommercialIrrigation & livestockIndustrial & MiningThermoelectric

6,084 398 2%4,304 72%79 2%1,303 23% 

3,787 418 12%2,853 75% 57 1%459 12%

-38% 

5% 33%

28%-65%

Surface Water (mgpd)Public Supply, Domestic & CommercialIrrigation & livestockIndustrial & MiningThermoelectric

1,721 28% 19723041290

839 22% 24214211445

-51% 

19%-38%67%-66%

Ground Water (mgpd)Public Supply, Domestic & CommercialIrrigation & livestockIndustrial & MiningThermoelectric 

4,360 72%  2014,0737513

2,948 78%  17627114614  

-32% 

-12% -33%

-39%8%

Figure 1.2: Major rivers in Kansas (Enchanted learning, 2011)

Figure 1.3: Solomon River Basin, Kansas (Kansas Department of Agriculture, 2006)

Figure 1.4: Major river basins in Kansas (USGS, 2004)Figure 1.5: High Plains Regional Groundwater Study (USGS, 2011)

BackgroundTop dentists are urging the city of Wichita, Kansas to start adding fluoride to the city’s drinking water. In past years Wichita has decided not to put fluoride in their water supply. Wichita is one of the last cities that do not fluorinate their water supply. Fluoridation is the act of adding fluoride to a water supply to try and better the community’s oral health. Many dentists believe that fluorination is something that should be performed, no questions about it. They notice improvements throughout the community’s health when fluorination is used. Even though, there is a large amount of scientific data to support that fluorination of water is overall a very good idea, there is still some opposition to the idea of fluorinating Wichita’s water supply. Fluorination of water has been happening is America since 1945. Grand Rapids, Michigan was the first city in the world to become artificially fluorinated in 1945. Studies in later years proved that children in Grand Rapids had a much lower tooth decay rate than children in neighboring towns and cities. When water is fluorinated it is set a 1part per million which is a very tiny amount compared to other chemical levels the Environmental Protection Agency allows cities to put in the drinking water. More cavities and bad oral health overall can be seen when looking at other states throughout America that do not use water fluoridation.

Reasons why it is a good ideaFluorination is generally regarded as a good idea. Fluoride is found in some level in all water supplies. The issue cities face is to increase their waters fluoride levels to try and benefit the community. The main benefit of fluorination results in healthier teeth for the community. The citizens have less cavities, gingivitis, and other teeth and gum diseases. Most dentists are in favor of fluorination (Fred Mann). “Water fluoridation is a no-brainer” (Fred Mann). “There has been a dramatic decline in tooth decay among children since the 1960’s; adding fluoride to the city water is largely responsible for the decline” (Fred Mann). Wichita is among the top cities with the worst dental health in America. A group of dental health experts say that Wichita is one of the top ten cities in America that does not use fluoridated water. These experts say Kansas as a whole receives a grade C for children’s dental care. About 63% of the state of Kansas is using fluoridated water. The main reason the grade is so low is because Wichita is bringing it down. Fluoridation of water is supported by the World Health Organization (WHO). The World Health Organization believes that water should be fluoridated where it can be technically and politically feasible. Studies in Europe show that Ireland, (who does not use fluoridated water) has a higher tooth decay rate than other countries like England and a few Nordic countries. Naturally fluorinated water (about 1 part per million) has been available to people in their drinking water for centuries and no health issue has been related to it.

Opposition to fluorinationThere have been claims made for years that fluoridation of water has been a factor in every health issue known to modern medicine. There are many groups of people that believe fluorination is truly a bad thing. These people believe that cities have been poisoning the community for years. They believe that fluoridation can cause birth defects, Alzheimer’s disease, and a higher cancer rate. These allegations against fluoridation do not have much scientific background behind it. These groups of people claim that fluoridation of water is detrimental to the health of the people that consume it. Although, scientists and health experts say recent studies have shown there are no biological or chemical differences between fluoridated water and natural fresh water.

OutcomeWichita is not likely to start fluoridation of water anytime soon. In 1964 Wichita city council decided to pass an ordinance to start fluoridation of water, but the citizens voted to repeal it shortly afterwards. This was attempted again in 1978 but was once again voted against by the voters in Wichita. In 1999 a health group tried to push for fluoridation of water but health group coalition filed a list of complaints against fluoridation stating that it would just cause a large amount of health issues for the city of Wichita. Wichita needs to find a way to appeal to the objectors of fluoridation or find a way to keep the oral health of the city at a level equivalent to the rest of America. Until then, the city of Wichita will continue to have bad oral health.

Figure 1.1: Annual Average Precipitation (Kansas Geological Survey, 2000)

Figure: 3.1 Percent of Population, by county served by Fluorinated Public Water Supply. (Kansas Health Institute, 2011)

Figure: 3.2 Rates of Tooth Decay From 1930-1990 (Compiled from Health Department records of 5-year-olds'tooth decay 1930-1990, 1997)

Figure: 3.3 Percent of Fluoridated Water by State (Center for Disease Control, 2008)