WaterWired

Cooperation on the Colorado River

You all know by now that I have a fondness for the Colorado River. I'm often pessimistic about the situation there, but today there is some news of cooperation among environmentalists, water managers, the U.S. government (U.S. Bureau of Reclamation), and others.

The story centers around the USBR's Yuma Desalting Plant, which took 18 years and $250M to complete. Heck, I was in grad school when the thing was started! To top that, it has not been used for about 13 years, because by the time it was completed, it was unneeded. It was built to desalt the Colorado River so that the water we delivered to Mexico, 1.5 million acre-feet per year (about 59 cms), was "fresh enough" so as to not ruin irrigated agriculture in the Mexicali Valley. The USA could have met those standards by reducing irrigated agriculture in the WelIton-Mohawk Irrigation and Drainage District (www.wellton-mohawk.org) north of Yuma. It was the return flow from the WMIDD that was the "straw that broke the camel's back" vis-a-vis the river's salinity. For reasons that are best the subject of another post (or 2, or 3) the USBR opted for the desalting plant.

By the time the plant was finished, flows in the Colorado were high and there was plenty of water of sufficient quality available without using desalted  WMIDD water. The salinity problem was avoided by digging a canal for the WMIDD drainage water and allowing the water to flow south,

where it created a marvelous 15,000-acre (6,100-hectare) wetland, the Cienega de Santa Clara (see map, courtesy of the San Diego Union-Tribune). This has become an important wildlife habitat, especially for migratory birds.

So what's the problem? Well, now the Southwest is in the throes of a drought, and every bit of the Colorado's flow is needed to meet deliveries to Mexico. Even the WMIDD water is needed, so the USBR is firing up the plant for a 90-day test run. If the plant goes online (the decision is not certain), then the WMIDD water will be desalted and added to the river's flow; it will no longer flow to the Cienega de Santa Clara, which will then cease to exist.

Here's where the cooperation comes in - the USBR, environmentalists (both in Mexico and the USA), and the Central Arizona Project are working together to try to find a solution that will provide good-quality water to Mexico, but save the cienega. This could involve desalting poor-quality ground water to supply the cienega. 

This story was recently reported today on NPR's Morning Edition and in the San Diego Union-Tribune:

http://www.signonsandiego.com/news/state/20070326-9999-1n26desalt.html

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=9237380&sc=emaf

When it comes to Western water, good things sometimes do happen.

"One hand washes the other, and the two wash the face."
                 -- translation of a Spanish proverb on cooperation

Land Use Planning and Water Planning: Never the Twain Shall Meet

They say that "great minds think alike", although I suppose one could also say "small minds think alike". Either one applies in the case of this post, which I have been planning for many weeks. I'll get to the applicability of the aformentioned aphorisms in a minute. But let's get down to the land use - water use nexus.

One of my pet peeves is the lack of integration of land use planning with water planning here in the USA. Whether it's east, west, north, or south, more often than not, this is the case. It's a dysfunctional planning system, prone to failure from the start. The major (but not the only) reason is that water management/allocation in the USA is generally a state function, whereas land use planning and water distribution are left to local governments -- counties or municipalities. This is the so-called "governance gap".

Things are changing, to be sure. Here in Oregon, Umatilla County has taken a proactive role to integrate the two. Their efforts have not always been greeted with enthusiasm by state officials.

The land-water disconnect is not a Western USA phenomenon. A recent article in the Baltimore Sun illustrated this for Carroll County, MD, which held a water summit to address growth vs. water issues:

http://www.baltimoresun.com/news/local/carroll/bal-md.ca.water04feb04,0,2819450.story?coll=bal-local-carroll

In the Carroll County case, Maryland's "Smart Growth" policy is colliding with the state's water policy. Municipalities are being told by the state that they don't have enough water for more growth, which encourages growth outside the urban boundaries, which means larger lots, wells, and septic tanks -- which promotes sprawl, which defeats "smart growth".

Impact, the excellent "theme" publication of the American Water Resources Association (www.awra.org), devoted its November 2005 issue to "Water as a Growth Tool". Michelle Henrie guest-edited the issue. Feature articles and brief synopses can de downloaded here:

Download 0511imp_toc.pdf

AWRA members can read the articles online.

A former student of mine in the University of New Mexico's Water Resources Program (www.unm.edu/~wrp/), Kyle Harwood, now an Assistant City Attorney for Santa Fe, NM, discussed Santa Fe's adoption of a "wet growth" policy - integration of land use and water planning. Harwood explained that this action was in response to the severe 2002 drought (which is still continuing as far as I know). The implementation of its "wet growth regulations" now has the "City Different" balancing water rights, available water supplies, and the infrastructure needed to treat and move water around the city. Makes sense, right?

There are a number of other thoughtful articles in the issue. One described the case of the "use-it-or-lose- it" provision of prior appropriation water law, something with which we are blessed (I am being facetious) in the Western USA. The town of Waldport, OR, wanted to plan for its future growth by securing a permit to use water on a nearby stream to accommodate expected growth. Sound planning, right? Guess again - this is the West. Under Oregon water law, the town had to develop that permit (which was not a certificated water right) to use the water within five years or forfeit the permit. So Waldport was faced with the reality that it would have to develop the infrastructure to use the water, only to have sit unused till growth could utilize it. To shorten a long story, the Oregon Supreme Court and the legislature intervened to change the law.

The last Impact article I will mention is one by Lynn Markham et al. that discussed how Wisconsin communities are integrating ground water resource protection into land-use decisions. A 1999 Wisconsin law requires that land-use decisions be based upon a comprehensive plan. At the following WWW site you can read about community ground water planning and implementation and download five useful reports:

http://www.uwsp.edu/cnr/landcenter/groundwater/

Finally - the "great minds think alike" thing. At a meeting this morning, I was just starting to launch my "we need to integrate land use planning and water planning" routine, when friend Paul Wichlacz of Idaho National Laboratory smiled and whipped out an article "Water the West" by Sarah B. Van de Wetering of the University of Montana:

http://www.headwatersnews.org/perspective.html

In it, Sarah (who as Sarah Bates, co-authored Overtapped Oasis: Reform or Revolution for Western Water with the late Marc Reisner), discussed the "governance gap", among other things, and also introduced her recent report from the University of Montana's Public Policy Research Institute, Bridging the Governance Gap: Strategies to Integrate Water and Land Use Planning, which you can download here:

Download Public_Policy_Water_Land_Report.pdf

It's  not long - about 15 pages. Give it a read - you'll like it.

So what's next? How about the regulatory disconnect between water quantity and water quality? Coming soon to a blog near you!

"In the West, of course, where water is concerned, logic and reason have never figured prominently in the scheme of things." -- Marc Reisner

Bottled Water? Not at These Bay Area Restaurants

Whether they realize it or not, toney Bay Area restaurants are doing something for World Water Day. A friend of mine just emailed me a story from the 21 March 2007 issue of the San Francisco Chronicle about some sustainably-inclined Bay Area restaurateurs who have eschewed bottled water.

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2007/03/21/FDGU1OMMT61.DTL

Reporter Carol Ness describes a growing number of restaurants that are now serving carafes of tap water ---TAP WATER --- albeit filtered, and sometimes carbonated (a carbonator costs about $400).

The restaurants are not only concerned about the bottom line, but also the environmental impacts of using bottled water, often shipped from Europe, or from across the Pacific Ocean, in plastic bottles. And not all bottled water is spring water - some of it is actually tap water.

The article also mentioned that Susan Leal, General Manager of the SF Public Utilities Commission, is crusading to wean SF city offices off bottled water. She has mostly succeeded in her own offices.

"Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity, and I'm not sure about the former." -- Albert Einstein

World Water Day: Thinking Outside the Bottle

World Water Day. World Water Day is March 22 (visit www.worldwaterday.org). The UN General Assembly created this in 1992, as an outgrowth of the Rio de Janeiro Conference. For 2007, WWD's theme is Coping With Water Scarcity. Here are some sobering facts:

1) Water scarcity occurs when the amount of water withdrawn from lakes, rivers, or ground (subsurface) water is so great that water supplies are no longer adequate to satisfy all human or ecosystem requirements, bringing about increased competition among potential demands.

2) Water scarcity has also been defined as a situation where water availability in a country or region is below 1000 cubic meters (264,000 gallons) per person per year. However, many regions in the world experience much greater scarcity, living with fewer than 500 cubic meters (132,000 gallons) per person per year.

3) Water scarcity is among the main problems to be faced by many societies and the world in the 21st century. Water use has been growing at more than twice the rate of population increase in the last century, and, although there is no global water scarcity as such, an increasing number of regions are chronically short of water.

4) 1.8 billion people will be living in countries or regions with absolute water scarcity by 2025, and two-thirds of the world population could be under water stress conditions.

5) Remember that as part of the UN's Millennium Development Goals (www.undp.org/mdg/), we want to reduce by 50% the number of people living without access to potable water (over 1 billion) and sanitary facilities (over 2.2 billion) by 2015. To do that we have to supply clean water to about 210,000 more people each day and provide access to sanitary facilities to about 450,000 more people each day.

Here is a UN flyer on water scarcity: Download waterscarcity.pdf 

And some links to relevant UN publications:

freshwater.unep.net/index.cfm?issue=water_scarcity

www.unesco.org/water/wwap/wwdr2/table_contents.shtml

If you are in Corvallis, Oregon, on March 22, come to Oregon State University's WWD Film Festival. Download iww_world_water_day_film_series.pdf

Thinking Outside the Bottle. In conclusion, I was going to do something fancy in this blog, such as use the WWD logo (www.worldwaterday.net). As I was thinking about that, I noticed way down on the bottom of the aforementioned WWW page, in the fine print, it says "Copyright 2007 Ethos Water". Ethos Water is owned by Starbucks and sells bottled water for $1.80 per bottle, which translates to almost $10 per gallon or about $2.50 per liter. For my fellow water wonks, that's a bit over $3 million per acre foot.

I won't go into a rant about Ethos Water and bottled water in general - been there, done that (you can see my 16 January 2007 post on Do You Think About What You Drink? A Modest Proposal). But harking back to that post's premise, let's think of something positive to do to help alleviate suffering due to lack of water. So for the week starting today, eschew bottled water and other "frivolous" beverages, and put that money aside. At the end of the week, double what you have, and make a donation to your favorite water charity. If you do not have one, donate to one of the following:

Ann Campana Judge Foundation www.acjfoundation.org    [Disclosure: this is my 501(c)(3)]

Lifewater International: www.lifewater.org

Living Water: www.water.cc

El Porvenir: www.elporvenir.org

Pure Water for the World: www.purewaterfortheworld.org

WaterAid America: www.wateraid.org.uk/usa/default.asp

Agua Para La Vida: www.aplv.org 

Flowing Streams Ministries: www.flowingstreamsministries.org

Wells for Life International: www.wfl-wellsforlife.org

Millennium Water Alliance: www.mwawater.org

Whatever you drink will taste a lot better.

" Remember, 'Evian' spelled backwards is 'naive'."

Session at Geological Society of America Meeting

This Hydrophilanthropy stuff is catching on. Good friend Dr. Dave Kreamer ([email protected]) at UNLV (to my knowledge, the first person to use the term "Hydrophilanthropy") is co-chairing a session on "Hydrogeological Research, Capacity Building and Teaching in the Developing World" for the Geological Society of America's Annual Meeting, 28-31October 2007 in Denver, Colorado, USA (www.geosociety.org).

Dave is anxious to spread the word, so please inform others, and let him know if anyone special should be invited. The due date for electronic abstracts is 10 July 2007. The electronic submission form will be available on GSA’s Web site 1 April through 10 July. The text of electronic abstracts will be archived and remain completely searchable on GSA’s Web site for many years to come.

If I weren't chairing the AWRA Conference and moderating my own session, I'd be at Dave's session!

"Water is the true wealth in a dry land." -- Wallace Stegner