Skydd mot nitrat och bekämpningsmedel i dricksvatten : åtgärder och styrmedel i fem länder

Abstract: In many European countries there is an increasing concern about the occasionally high concentrations of nitrate and pesticides in drinking water. The advent of the EU Water Framework Directive particularly highlights this. The directive states that all large drinking water sources should be identified and protected from pollution before 2009 and that by 2015 all water bodies should reach a 'good status'. In Sweden about 60 percent of the drinking water sources have protection areas. This means that about 700 new water protection areas need to be designated before 2009. This will affect many farmers, restricting their farming practices. The purpose of this study was to investigate which methods are used in other countries concerning nitrate and pesticide pollution from agriculture. From this, the expectation was to generate ideas on what could be undertaken in Sweden when designating new protection areas. Countries included in the study were Denmark, Finland, Germany, the United Kingdom and the northeast part of the USA. Denmark and Finland were dealt with as whole nations, whereas in Germany, United Kingdom and USA the focus was on individual states or regions. (Lower Saxony and North Rhine-Westphalia in Germany, England and Wales in the UK and the Mid-Atlantic region in the USA.) Information has been collected from literature, Internet and through contacts with authorities, companies and organisations in the different countries. The results indicate that measures to reduce nitrate and pesticide pollution from agriculture are similar, while the method of implementing these measures differs from one country to another. A list of common measures can be seen in table 1. Nearly all of the measures are also used in Sweden. Still, there are many methods of implementing that are worth considering as alternatives to these used in Sweden. For example, in some of the countries studied, the farmers' right to compensation is stronger than in Sweden. There are also many examples of co-operations between agriculture and water suppliers and in some countries voluntary action programmes play a more important part compared to Sweden. All five countries have some type of statutory water protection areas. In Germany cooperative agreements between farmers and water suppliers are quite common. Lower Saxony has a co-operation model where water suppliers, authorities and land users work together to deal with drinking water protection on a local scale. The regional authorities in Denmark are currently working on action plans for all large drinking water supplies. Measures in these action plans should preferably be carried out on a voluntary basis such as through co-operative agreements between farmers and water suppliers. In Finland, restrictions in ground water protection areas are not mandatory and there is not much focus on agriculture since it is not considered a major source of pollution. Most farms in Finland are involved in some of the agri-environmental schemes and this, together with legislation, is considered enough for protecting water supplies. In England, statutory water protection areas have only been used once. Instead the Environmental Agency has designated non-regulatory protection areas for groundwater sources. Often voluntary action programs are preferred to legislation and there are many such programs and agri-environmental schemes directed at the protection of natural resources in England. In the USA, each state is responsible for completing assessments for public water systems. This is comparable to the work undertaken by the EU Water Framework Directive. Action programs for source water protection are not statutory, but are strongly encouraged by the US Environmental Protection Agency. Extension services, agri-environmental schemes and Best Management Practices are important measures in reducing the impact of nitrate and pesticides from agriculture to water sources. Cooperations within watersheds between agriculture, authorities, water suppliers and different organisations have been successful and will probably be used more frequently in the future.