WHO WANTS TO DO THE WORK ON WATER..?

Who wants to do the work on water…?

The article below first appeared in the Green Valley News and Sun – Tuesday – 8 July 08 – issue and was authored by Nancy Freeman. I do not know, Ms. Freeman, though I find her comments to be “spot-on” respecting how “we” react whenever the notion is raised to work on water issues. Like her, I too have found there are only a handful of individuals willing to commit to actively working to find long term viable equitable environmental sound solutions to the myriad of water issues we have created for ourselves and generations yet to come in Arizona. Though many of her examples lean towards circumstances in Southern Arizona, one can very easily substitute topics and entities within their locale. I invite you to read her most timeless assessment of some of the water dilemma we face in Arizona respecting our water.

If you don’t agree with her, what is your assessment, I would be most interested in hearing from you.

////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////

Guest Comment: By Nancy Freeman …. Who wants to do the work on water?
Published: Tuesday, July 8, 2008 11:08 PM MDT …. Green Valley News and Sun

The Water Forum arranged by Rep. Gabrielle Giffords July 1 went off very well. Good information—most of it accurate—was given by all the participants. Several made the suggestion that we should work together…. Work? Who wants to do any work? In four years of water activism, I haven’t found anyone who wanted to do anything at all.
 We can start at the top: the federal government. The betrayal and duplicity started with the CAP pipeline—the most expensive water delivery system in the world. Let’s face it, the Bureau of Reclamation needed a big money water project, and they needed justification for the project.The best target was agriculture users—most of them cotton farmers—who were drawing down the water table at a rate of 2.5 million acre feet per year. That deficit was sufficient justification to require some supplemental water. In the late 1950s, “the political power” realized that the farmers were not going to pay for water. The “political powers” decided, “no problem, we can just use it for the growth and development market." Don Hummel, mayor of Tucson (1955-1961), outlined the scenario clearly in his autobiography.Thereafter in a budget revamping, President Carter deemed that the CAP project was unnecessary. But Arizona would not be appeased—they were licking their chops to get that water to get revenue for Arizona’s growth industry. You know, “Build the roads, the taxpayers will come” mentality that still exists here.
 State: To appease President Carter, Gov. Bruce Babbitt somehow got a Groundwater Code written…. That “wonderful, innovative” Groundwater Code that omitted doing anything about the user of 80 percent of the water—and for which the pipeline was instigated. So the cotton got good quality groundwater and the municipal users got the lower quality CAP water.
 Local legislators: We need some legislation to help us here against the onslaught of mining and further development. We managed to get a smile and a promise from Sen. Tim Bee. Rep. Marian McClure promised to introduce a bill on water for us. No action, except passing the buck to Rep. Jonathan Paton. He never returned my phone calls or e-mails. None of them were at the forum, or have attended the Rosemont hearings.
 Governor: Our esteemed governor declared a water awareness month for we municipal users—only 20 percent of the water use. What happened to that 2.8 million acre-feet of Colorado River water (1.5 a.f. for CAP) we received to solve the 2.5 million acre-foot deficit caused by agriculture pumping? Maybe we should be aware that the federal government is subsidizing the cotton farmers by giving us low quality water to replace their pumping.
 State Trust Land Department: They have “lots of land to develop down here.” Therefore, their representative from the attorney general’s office felt justified to delay an idea suggest by the county to require new development to put in money for a recharge basin in Green Valley.
 Pima County: Some three years ago, I contacted the county with information that the Bureau of Reclamation would do a comprehensive study of how to get water to Green Valley for a price tag of $1 million. It would be possible for the feds to throw in one-half matching funds. Who would put up the local half? Since a government entity was necessary, the county was the only recourse. No action on their part.
 Pima County wastewater: They contracted to give Quail Creek all the Green Valley wastewater—on credits. This means they recharge the water at the wastewater site and pump groundwater at their golf course.
 Pima County Flood Control: They have ignored a flood area in the Sahuarita Heights area. The flooding was so bad two years ago that it picked up the tool shed with tools — and several heavy Rototillers — and moved it some 20 feet at the Community Garden where I participate.
 Green Valley Community Coordinating Council: They have chosen to remain uninformed for the five years I have lived here. Former President Dick Roberts showed up at the Corporation Commission meeting last December with the comment: “We want to know if we have a deficit.” I had told both he and Tom Ward four years ago that all they had to do was call the Arizona Water Department to obtain all the numbers. Today, the new president was quite hopeful, speaking of the declining water table in terms of inches—when the depletion is 2-3 feet per year.
 Mines: They have no need to use alternative CAP water because they have “grandfathered” rights from buying up Canoa Ranch; otherwise, they would be exempt. Three years ago, I suggested to the manager that they try some stormwater capture in their well field, as that would make it easy to test and measure their effectiveness. No action.
 Pecan Groves: Although agriculture in the region has pumped a trillion of acre-feet of water from the aquifer in the past 90 years, they were not willing to help the cause even though the pipeline terminus is only a couple of miles away. Their major excuse: the mines aren’t doing anything.
 Local groups: The Groundwater Awareness League (an educational 501 3(c) organization), applied to the local charitable White Elephant for a grant to have a program of building small recharge basins in the region by schoolchildren. I had lined up support from the Water Resources WET program, the U of A Water Wise program, Tucson’s Catch organization and the Austins who have successfully raised the water table at their ranch. Turned down.
 PUG group: They propose to construct a 30,000 acre-feet pipeline to Sahuarita, even though there is less than 6,000 acre-feet of CAP allocation in this region. There could be an excess of water for a few years, for they have not taken into account that Tucson will be using their full allotment within 5 years and very little excess water will be available. Even the Groundwater Replenishment District is not able to get allocations. That group is scrambling for water to fulfill their obligations.
 Golf courses: In spite of a study done by a couple of University of Arizona graduate students showing the potential amount of water collected on each golf courses, the golf management has shown no interest in participation in creating a few recharge areas with dry wells to help the water percolate down to the water table. In fact, the latest (2002) Canoa golf course has a 500 acre-foot lake. All of the golf courses pump groundwater.
 Water Companies: This Canoa lake was enabled by the Green Valley Water District furnishing them groundwater and replenishing the use at Pima Mine Road recharge facility. I have fielded dozens of complaints about the 200 acre-foot lake at Sahuarita that is used for family recreation. It’s the “mote in your neighbor’s eye” phenomenon.The Community Water Co. touted in its annual report that it had doubled its users in the past five years!! Further, they are considering giving the CAP allocations (for which the members have paid millions) to Rosemont Mining Co., without the slightest intention of listening to the wishes of the members.If the water companies had raised our rates just $4 a month when they purchased the CAP allocations 25 years ago, we would have money for a pipeline how.Now I ask you: Who is willing to do the work? Hopefully, Rep. Giffords will be able to provide the leadership needed to get some water flowing to Green Valley. We have to have a portfolio of remedies, which could include limiting new users. As Frank Postillion of Pima County stated, we are all going to have to pay for the water augmentation and the cost should be proportioned according to percentage of use.Green Valley resident Nancy Freeman is with the Groundwater Awareness League.