I think, you are generally right. The difference is, that the groundwater QUALITY is mainly harmed by direct pollution, whereas the GW QUANTITY is influenced to a large extend by human induced climate change.

Dear Kenneth M Towe

I strongly agree with you. When I read the newest Dan Brown's book (Inferno), I somehow was afraid that if this population rate gets out of hand, someone or some radical groups might do something terrible for the sake of this planet to lower the rate. As you said, the solution is a real dilemma. Scientists found a way to make applicable fuel from corn fields in order to find a better replacement for the fossil fuel and also lower the pollution released by it. However, developing more cultivated land means releasing more pollution into both surface and groundwater, increasing the rate of evapotranspiration, lowering GW tables and so forth.

I believe the first step toward making some improvement is to convince the governments that political decisions should be based on scientific facts. This can be a start to think about having scientific government instead of political one.

P. s. I am really glad that you spent time to read my question and write an answer to it. I'll be glad to discuss this issue with you further.

Regards  

Human activity is probably the source of almost every change in nature including climat change, groundwater quality degradation, water quantity decrease and many others. Recent years, China is carrying out land creation projects in and around many mountainous cities to create more flat land for city expansion. These land creation projects usually cover scores and even hundreds of square kilometers. Such huge projects will alter original landforms, destroy forests, change original watercources, impact climate and cause geological hazards. Please see my comment piece published in Nature available at http://www.nature.com/news/environment-accelerate-research-on-land-creation-1.15327. I also attached it below. These projects, in my opinion, will be punished by our nature mother in the future.

At the global scale the answer is obviously both humans & climates!  And it seems silly to argue one or the other, especially if you think ALL climate change is human induced anyway.

For local areas it depends on your local situation.  And you need to look first for LOCAL causes (which may have local solutions) before trying to shift the blame on a global effect (which probably can't be fixed without a major shift in everyones attitudes).

Even human activity has caused many disasters and degradation of our natural environment, some people are still ignoring these changes. They pretend to care about environment, and say a lot about environmental protection. However, their behaviors are not consistent with what they have said. There is still a long way ahead for environmental protection, and environmental protection needs more than words.

I agree with Ken and Kenneth. "Climate change" is in the eye of the beholder. Or more ironically, in the eye of the emitter. Concentrating populations create a myriad of issues such as microclimates, pollution, scarcity, and complexity. In concentrated areas such as cities, heat island effect has a large impact on not only creating microclimates, but also how my company approaches environmental control for a building. The net result is the requirement for more energy. The embodiments of energy are electricity, gas, water and consumable goods. My livelihood as a performance contractor is conserving energy, For the past couple of years, I stopped looking at energy and its conservation, and looked at exergy and its conservation. Making sustainability cash flow.  

Yes some times they are responsible for example when they discharged water to ground water aquifer they affect the quantity and quality.

Also climate have impact such as increasing rainfall which Amy have impact on landslide and could increase the water in aquifers.

Regards

Thanks for correction Dr. Kenneth

But change in rainfall during last years and increasing the ground wAter quantity could be related on long-run for weather or climate? 

Kenneth- thanks for the voice of reason from the beltway (assuming that you are still residing there). Just to let you know, I am working on a dairy which everything is being reused. This is not a rich nor large farm. The project cash flows on paper the first day of production. Sustainability by definition, means that it has to be sustainable. That means it has to pay for itself. That would be considered heresy in some circles, since it takes tax payers and smarter bureaucrats to make thiings sustainable. 

i totally agree with Kenneth

Definitely human interventions affecting practically everything. Also items which humans want tperserve are affected by their activities.