Misrepresenting water issues irresponsible
by Hugh Holub on Feb. 06, 2011, under environment water and energy, politicsThree Sonorans has a post One major US city may run out of water within 24 hours which in unfortunately a prime example of how the environmental movement is constantly predicting apocolypse and misleading the public.
There is a lot more to the El Paso story….they have been aware for a long time their groundwater reserves are limited and have been trying to solve that problem. Juarez is also in the same boat. Agriculture has priority on the Rio Grande and there are interstate conflicts between Texas and New Mexico over transporting water from New Mexico to El Paso.
Meanwhile right now the problem in El Paso is related to the cold weather and power outages…not due to any actual shortage of water:
From the El Paso Times:
…. The shortage is due to a number of compounding factors, said John Balliew, vice president of operations and technical services for the utility. Rolling blackouts took electric pumps offline, reducing the volume of water that could be pumped to reservoirs and impacted operations at the utility’s water desalination plant, he said. Freezing temperatures also damaged telecommunication and control equipment for wells, reservoirs and booster stations across the city, Balliew said.
Further, four water main breaks caused by freezing temperatures and numerous water line breaks in homes and businesses have strained the system. According to Costanzo, the utility received more than 2,000 calls from customers for assistance on Saturday alone.
Tucson Water had similar, though not as extensive problems due to the cold last week.
Going to the bigger picture about Tucson’s water future….
Folks really need to understand the allocation system that governs who gets water from the Colorado River.
Agricultural users of water from the river in California and Arizona have a higher priority than do Los Angeles and Phoenix and Tucson.
When the inevitable crunch comes Tucson is not going to run out of water.
What will have to happen is the cities dependent on the river will either have to buy out the farms along the Colorado and in the Imperial Valley, or lease water from Indian tribes who hold the most senior allocations.
Water will likely be a lot more expensive as a result…meaning the days of using potable water on golf courses and lawns will have to end…and more direct use of effluent for landscaping will be necessary as will be capturing stormwater runoff and using that for outdoor uses.
Tucson is actually way ahead of most cities in facing the future and moving to conserve water and require use of stormwater. Tucson has developed an extensve effluent reuse system. Pima County, unfortunately, works against good management of effluent, which is why Marana is seking to gain control of the wastewater treatment plant out that way.
Here is information from a previous article Will the Central Arizona Project be an empty ditch?
A total of 7.5 million acre feet of river water is allocated to Arizona, California and Nevada and another 1.5 million acre feet to Mexico by treaty.
Nevada has 300,000 acre feet of river water. California has 4.4 million acre feet, Arizona has 2.8 million acre feet.
But the story gets more interesting because each state has internal priorities.
Out of California’s 4.4 million acre feet per year, 3.85 million acre feet are allocated to the Palo Verde Irrigation District, the Yuma Project, Imperial Irrigation District and the Coachella Valley Water District
Los Angeles, via the Metropolitan Water District of Southern California has an allocation of 500,000 acre feet at 4th priority.
Thus if the river runs short of the 4,4 million acre foot share , Los Angeles gets cut off first.
Arizona’s 2.8 million acre is allocated as follows:
Coloado River Water Allocations…Arizona
First Priority
Colorado River Indian Reservation 662,402
Fort Mojave Indian Reservation 103,535
Total Indian share 765,939
Yuma County Water Users’ Association 254,200
Total Agricultural share 254200
First Priority share of water for Arizona: 1,020, 137
Third Priority
Wellton-Mohawk Irrigation and Drainage District 278,000
Yuma Mesa Irrigation and Drainage District 141,519
Third Priority share of water for Arizona 419,515
Fourth Priority
Central Arizona Water Conservation District 1,500,000 (approximate) 1,500,000
Total Arizona allocations 2,939,652
The important thing to note is that in the event Arizona cannot receive its full 2.8 million acre feet per year, the allocation goes by priority….with the CAWCD allocation first off the river.
In the 1968 enabling legislation that authorized the Central Arizona Project, 1.2 million acre feet was subordinated to guarantee California’s 4.4 million acre feet per year.
Thus in the case of both California and Arizona the effect of a prolonged drought hits cities first, and Indians and farms last.
Obviously if the river cannot keep supplying 4.4 million acre feet of water per year to California and 2.8 million acre feet per year to Arizona, something has got to give.
Would it be easier to relocate millions of urban residents dependent on Colorado River water, or buy rights to senior Colorado River allocations from Indians and farmers?
People are worried that the CAP canal will run dry to Phoenix and Tucson.
It probably won’t….but Colorado River water will cost a lot more than it does now.
Why?
Because in the event of a prolonged shortage the urban interests will have to buy out the higher priority agricultural iunterests and lease water from Indian Tribes.
What urban interests need to focus on is how to purchase and retire farm lands in the Imperial and Coachella valleys to sustain Los Angeles, and in the Yuma area to keep the water flowing to Phoenix and Tucson.
If predictions are correct that the Colorado River may only be able to reliably deliver half the water that was allocated, farming in the Imperial and Coachella valleys and in Yuma is doomed.
Residents of Los Angeles, San Diego, Phoenix and Tucson will pay a premium for Colorado River water to buy out priority agricultural water users and mitigate the economic damage that would come to Yuma and Imperial counties of farms were shut down and water rights transferred to cities.
Water-demanding farms looked at as resources vanish
One reason farmers can take so much water is that they staked their claim first, which is what matters in Western water law. Most of the irrigation districts in Yuma hold rights to the Colorado River that predate Hoover Dam, which means if the river starts to run dry, the farmers get their share before anyone else. They can lease water to other users but keep the long-term rights.
Together, the largest water districts in the Yuma area can divert more than 750,000 acre-feet of water from the Colorado each year. Metropolitan Las Vegas, with a population of more than 2 million, can draw just 300,000 acre-feet a year.
California’s Colorado River Allocation
Metropolitan Water District
Prior to 1922, when six of the seven states that are visited by the Colorado River or its tributaries signed the Colorado River Compact, there has been discussion about how the assets of the Colorado River should fairly be divided. An annual flow estimate of the Colorado River system was the basis of the 1922 compact which split use of the flow of the river between the Upper and Lower Basin states.
For many years, California has depended on surplus water to meet its water needs—and to supplement its basic apportionment of 4.4 million acre-feet per year. Southern California’s rights to Colorado River Water were thought to be solidified in the 1930s when a number of agencies signed water delivery contracts with the Secretary of the Interior. Contracts detailed the priorities, to use and store California’s apportionment of river water.
On January 16, 2001, outgoing Secretary of the Interior Bruce Babbitt signed a document establishing interim guidelines for determining when surplus Colorado River water would be available for California, Nevada and Arizona. The criteria will be in effect for 15 years, giving California a greater certainty of supply and a transition period in which to further develop water conservation, recycling, storage and transfer programs that will provide for separation from an over reliance on the Colorado River.
Palo Verde Irrigation District, the Yuma Project, Imperial Irrigation District and the Coachella Valley Water District (refer to map below) are the agricultural entities holding the first three priorities to the use of no more than 3.85 million acre-feet under the water delivery contracts.
The Metropolitan Water District (MWD) was allotted 550,000 acre-feet per year under a fourth priority right and 662,000 acre-feet per year under a fifth priority right. (The city of San Diego and San Diego County conveyed their water rights to MWD.) MWD holds a contract to divert additional 180,000 acre-feet of surplus water on an annual basis.
In return for accepting lower priorities, MWD was granted the exclusive right in California to accumulate up to 5 million acre-feet of water in storage at Lake Mead. This storage right has yet to be implemented by the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation.
Water from the Colorado River is delivered into MWD’s service area via the Colorado River Aqueduct (CRA). MWD diverts water from Lake Havasu, above Parker Dam. Between 1986 and 1999, the amount of water unused by agriculture and available to MWD has varied from zero to more than 500,000 acre-feet. This unused amount will continue to vary in the future as it is tied to economics, the type of crops planted, acreage irrigated, and the efficiency with which water is used.
As a result of increased Colorado River diversions by Arizona and Nevada (within their apportionments), MWD’s total diversions could eventually decline to its fourth priority right of 550,000 acre-feet per year plus water available from a conservation program with Imperial Irrigation District and a groundwater storage program with the Central Arizona Water Conservation District. Any water left unused by other California contractors with a higher priority than MWD would also be available.
In addition to the potential supply available to MWD from the unused portion of California’s normal apportionment, the Secretary of the Interior can allow MWD to divert water that is unused by Arizona and Nevada, as well as surplus water. In years in which surplus water is available, MWD would have the highest priority of any California contractor to divert that water by virtue of its fifth priority right.
-At this time, the first three priority rights to use 3.85 million acre-feet per year have not been quantified, making it difficult to develop and implement cooperative water supply programs. When there is no further quantification of the use of water, other than by priority rights, it is difficult to determine how much water has been conserved and is available for transfer to urban areas.
It’s like trying to build a charity food bank where the only guideline given the organizers is a monetary cap. They’ll need to know how best to spend their $10,000 dollars for example—by knowing the history of how much meat is needed, how many vegetables are consumed and how quickly other food staples are used up. There are steps underway to quantify use through a proposed Quantification Settlement Agreement.
Colorado River Compact
The compact divides the river basin into two areas, the Upper Division (comprising Colorado, New Mexico, Utah and Wyoming) and the Lower Division (Nevada, Arizona and California). The compact requires the Upper Basin states not to deplete the flow of the river below 75,000,000 acre feet (9.3×1010 m3) during any period of ten consecutive years. Based on historical rainfall patterns, the amount specified in the compact was assumed to allow a roughly equal division of water between the two regions. The states within each basin were required to divide their 7,500,000-acre (30,400 km2) foot per year (289 m³/s) share allotment among themselves. The compact enabled the widespread irrigation of the Southwest, as well as the subsequent development of state and federal water works projects under the United States Bureau of Reclamation. Such projects included the Hoover Dam and Lake Powell.The current specific annual allotments in the Lower Basin were established in 1928 as part of the Boulder Canyon Project. They are:
Upper Basin, 7.5 million acre·ft/year (293 m³/s) total Colorado 51.75% 3.88 million acre·ft/year (152 m³/s) Utah 23.00% 1.73 million acre·ft/year (68 m³/s) Wyoming 14.00% 1.05 million acre·ft/year (41 m³/s) New Mexico 11.25% 0.84 million acre·ft/year (33 m³/s) Arizona 0.70% 0.05 million acre·ft/year (2.0 m³/s) Lower Basin, 7.5 million acre·ft/year (293 m³/s) total California 58.70% 4.40 million acre·ft/year (172 m³/s) Arizona 37.30% 2.80 million acre·ft/year (109 m³/s) Nevada 4.00% 0.30 million acre·ft/year (12 m³/s) In addition to this, 1,500,000-acre-foot (1.85×109 m3)/year of Colorado River water is allocated to Mexico, pursuant to the treaty relating to the use of waters of the Colorado and Tijuana Rivers and of the Rio Grande, signed February 3, 1944, and its supplementary protocol signed November 14, 1944. Also, the lower basin can get an additional 1,100,000-acre-foot (1.36×109 m3)/year.[2]
Novmber 18 Arizona Daily Star article:
CAP describes costly future water options
See also:
Sharing Colorado River Water: History, Public Policy and the Colorado River Compact
by Joe Gelt
NCSE-NASA Curriculum Module – Colorado River water supply
February 6th, 2011 on 11:15 am
I agree, I don’t think water will suddenly just “run out”, but we will have drastic changes to our way of life and the economy.
You say water will cost a lot more… it may be the case that money won’t even matter. The way the water gets from Parker to Tucson is because of Navajo coal and Navajo power plants. They can shut off their supplies of coal, and then how do you get water here?
More importantly is how does Tucson get its electricity after that?
Even if they don’t cut off their supplies, coal is finite also, and will one day run out. Tucson will be many times larger by then, unless it already collapsed, so then what?
El Paso has extreme shortages now, and Tucson is not too far off. Just because we have an allocation of water doesn’t mean there will be water there to get. We won’t go dry overnight, but our economy will most likely collapse… and that is the point I’m trying to warn everyone of.
February 6th, 2011 on 11:18 am
I would argue that the more dangerous misrepresentation of our water supply comes from developers and miners. Just to make a hundreds of dollars and to provide hundreds of jobs the water supply of a city of over a million may be threatened. Maybe not today, maybe not tomorrow, but in 50 years? 100 years?
Or is that too far in the future, a mere two or three generations, for these corporations to think of? More mining and houses means more water consumption, and with a million people, we are already not guaranteed a future of water.
February 6th, 2011 on 11:27 am
Three….developers and miners don’t manage the water in the Tucson Active Management Area…the Arizona Department of Water Resources does. Developers have to prove a 100 year assured water supply to ADWR. All the mines…including the existing ones that pump over 40,000 acre feet in the TAMA never had to prove anthing as they were grandfathered in. One of the changes needed in state water law is to require ALL groundwater pumping to be replenished. That also include FICO and the rest of the agricultural use in the TAMA.
Going to your comment on the power supply for the CAP….there is Arizona’s share of Hoover Dam which is now allocated to irrigation and electrical districts in Pinal County and to the SRP which is used to pump groundwater. It would be far better for Arizona that when the current Hoover contracts expire in 2017 that power be reallocated to the CAP so the Navajo Generating Station could be shut down.
The real issue for everyone is that water is going to cost a lot more in the future and we need to start making some serious changes now….requiring everyone pumping groundwater to required to recharge, limiting potable water use outdoors, banning use of potable water for golf courses, getting water management included in effluent decisions by Pima County….lots of useful things to deal with.
February 7th, 2011 on 8:17 pm
“El Paso has extreme shortages now, and Tucson is not too far off. Just because we have an allocation of water doesn’t mean there will be water there to get. ”
Dude, take a class on logic.
“The way the water gets from Parker to Tucson is because of Navajo coal and Navajo power plants. They can shut off their supplies of coal, and then how do you get water here?”
Hmmm,so why is there no power plants outside of the Navajo “Nation”? Is it perhaps liberals like you stand in the way of building them?
February 6th, 2011 on 2:09 pm
Looks like you caught the Three Sonorans in one of his “National Enquirer” type headlines and stories. As I am not allowed to comment on his blogsite because he doesn’t like intelligent conservative comments.
I think people are tired of his blogs. He must not have much to do as there are far too many of his articles on the Tucson Citizen. Too much time on his hands. Too little research.
February 7th, 2011 on 8:18 pm
“As I am not allowed to comment on his blogsite because he doesn’t like intelligent conservative comments.”
Just remain anonymous and changed the name/email you enter every few days like the rest of us do.
February 6th, 2011 on 4:15 pm
Has the Three Sonorans ever been responsible in his “reporting?” One should never use the word reporting in the same sentence as the Three Sonorans, unless they are reporting on the latest piece of propaganda by the Three Sonorans.
February 6th, 2011 on 6:27 pm
He should be banned from commenting here. Let him see how it feels.
February 6th, 2011 on 8:06 pm
How many farms that were 100 acres now have 400 homes on the same amount of property? Using the water to irrigate returns it immediately. These housing developments make the builders rich and take the resources from everyone. In the East, the builders have filled New Jersey and moved into Pennsylvania. Housing complexes and shopping malls now make up what was prime farmland, 25 years ago. About 50% of these homes are empty, simply because they cost way too much for the area. The builders can build a house for a total cost of $50,000 but, they try to sell them for a minimum price of $350,000. Some people take the deal but foreclosures are at an all time high too. The builders got their money, the banks are the ones who lose out on this deal.
Local governments DID stop new commercial and industrial development for a few years. If you wanted to start a business, you had to use an existing structure. Those days are gone and now, so are a lot of the farms.
February 6th, 2011 on 10:45 pm
Looks like the “arizona-hispanic-republicans” blogsite takes after The Three Sonorans. I cant post a comment. So it looks like that new site is either a clone of the three Sonorans or is really him in sheeps clothing?? Am I wrong or does this new blogsite just post comments that agree with her views.
Tucson Citzen is getting to be just another liberal electronic fiswrap. (Except for this blog a couple of others.
February 7th, 2011 on 1:24 am
Just a fourth “S” for “skirt”…..
A one “man” enterprise with empty ideas, not worth my time at the moment.
February 7th, 2011 on 11:35 am
So how could my comment be blocked on the first time I commented? And it wasnt even a harsh one. (they never are just, insightful and intelligent!).
I figure that the new blogsite is either him in sheeps clothing or she is a very good froend who trade data with each other.
February 7th, 2011 on 11:35 am
I’m hearing buying water from ranchers and farmers. Then what happens to your most local food supplies? Minus water, you can’t grow food. Will we have to make a choice between water and food? Not a good choice as our bodies need both to survive. The cost of transporting food long distances also contributes to the cost and to the end results of climate change–less water or water at the wrong times.
Too many people living in a desert or on this plantet? We need to look beyond just buying agricultural water.
February 7th, 2011 on 5:09 pm
One needs to look at more detail within the agricultural water use sector…. livestock feed is not probably a high priority. …and using federally subsizided water and federal subsidized power to grow federally subsidized crops is something we also need to look at.
February 7th, 2011 on 8:20 pm
“The cost of transporting food long distances also contributes to the cost and to the end results of climate change–less water or water at the wrong times. ”
So growing food in the middle of the desert is natural?
February 7th, 2011 on 12:21 pm
Re Susan Lynn’s comment: The events you talk about happened in Colorado 5 or so yrs. ago. The Front Range megalopolis is short water. Rocky Ford (a town) produced wonderful melons, and sold their water rights to one or another of the cities. Melons are still available, but in short supply. We in the west have no option but to decide whether we want more people living here or a balanced, sustainable human ecology. “Desert Cadillac” suggested we should get rid of the cattle and the alfalfa fields to send the water to the western cities. I disagree. I prefer alfalfa and a supportable population. But what does the majority want, and how should it be implemented? It’s a serious discussion. The writer of the above superior article seems qualified and thoughtful. I recommend the subject to him.
February 7th, 2011 on 8:21 pm
“We in the west have no option but to decide whether we want more people living here or a balanced, sustainable human ecology.”
What we need is concentration camps and force sterilization.
Viva Grijalva!
February 7th, 2011 on 12:44 pm
Hugh – you still need to drill down further and get into the priorities within the CAP system. Because currently the entire amount of any shortage to CAP would be absorbed by: first – ending most recharge for long-term storage credits, then second – cutting into some of the short-term ag contracts. It wouldn’t even affect any of the municipal and industrial users with long-term contracts – that would require Lake Mead to drop more than 100 feet from it’s current level (at least) and numerous steps are being taken or considered that would prevent even the first level of shortage, at 1075′ AMSL. Then there is all the water that has been banked in regional aquifers that could be pumped out and delivered to make up for shortages. Don’t get me wrong – our aquifers will be hit hard if, and when, shortages occur, but no one is going without water.
February 7th, 2011 on 5:12 pm
The CAP system has its own internal priorities for the 1.2 MAF directly allocated to that element…but the CAP system is also like a “common carrier” in that other water can be moved through it such as Yuma priority water leased or purchased.
Banking water in good years…something MWD has done for decades…is also a good thing.
I still cannot forget 1983 when we actually were about to have water running over the road at Hoover Dam….
February 7th, 2011 on 12:52 pm
Why would the Three Sonorans let facts get in the way of a perfectly good misrepresentation? That would be unbecoming of a good leftist, don’t you think?