People should live where there’s water, not have to bring in water

the crop is ready for harvest, it needs to be picked. This is just one of the myriad of challenges that Mother Nature creates for our local growers.

I read the regional paper available in Yuma, and lately there are more interesting stories about water and water use. The headline on one story read ‘Metro Phoenix has more miles of canal than Venice and a river running right through it. Can we make the most of it?”

The article goes on to say that the creation of the Rio Salado project and the Tempe Town Lake has created nearly $2 billion of increased economic value with 42,000 people now working within a mile of the lake and 30,000 people living within that same mile. The goal is to create more waterfront and economic growth. No mention of reduced water use or increased water conservation that the other 14 counties are tasked with.

Another article spoke of recent reports that the Arizona Department of Water Resources found that there was not enough water in

Pinal County to support approved developments, much less new ones.

The Kyl Center for Water Policy called for sharply curtailing the activities of the Central Arizona Groundwater Replenishment District, which facilitates homebuilding in low water supply areas. Water cannot just flow from source to consumer based on market forces. The Kyl report strongly suggests that people should live where there is water, rather than trying to figure out how to get water to where people want to live.

The replenishment district was created to assure that developers who want to pump groundwater can demonstrate a 100 year water supply, the requirement in Arizona’s Active Management Areas under the 1980 Groundwater Act created by then-Gov. Bruce Babbitt.

The district’s job is to recharge the same amount of water elsewhere in the management area. Two obvious concerns are whether there are enough alternative water sources to cover the 100-year guarantee to replenish the water withdrawn and whether the replenishment takes place in the area where the water is withdrawn, since the purpose of putting the water back in the ground is to prevent water mining.

It was also interesting that the same week the conflicting water articles appeared, former Gov. Babbitt spoke to a conference of county supervisors calling for legislation that would give county officials the authority to manage groundwater.

He made an amazing admission for a man who helped create the transfer of water rights and the water wars. He said, “What we need to remember is it (Groundwater Act) doesn’t cover the state of Arizona. It covered parts of several counties, and when we passed that legislation, I’ve got to tell you, we didn’t pay enough attention to the rest of the state.”

Really, can you imagine that!

Bobbi Stevenson-McDermott is a retired soil and water conservationist. She can be reached at rjsm09@msn. com.