Water Transfers in the West Efficiency, Equity, and the Environment (1992) / Chapter Skim
Currently Skimming:
9 Central Arizona: The Endless Search for New Supplies to Water the Desert
9 Central Arizona: The Endless Search for New Supplies to Water the Desert
Pages 194-212
The Chapter Skim interface presents what we've algorithmically identified as the most significant single chunk of text within every page in the chapter.
Select key terms on the right to highlight them within pages of the chapter.
From page 194... ...
In 1980, Arizona implemented a major new water policy, the Ground Water Management Act, designed to achieve four objectives: (1) ground water conservation, (2)
|
From page 195... ...
1 a) 1 Z Wilcox Active management areas Water ranches FIGURE 9.1 Main waterways and related features, Arizona.
|
From page 196... ...
Moreover, Arizona law does not recognize any connection between ground water pumping and streamflows, so there is no protection against the adverse impacts of ground water transfers on riparian areas and surface water rights holders. The Ground Water Management Act's mandate to achieve safe yield in ground water use by the year 2025 and the requirement that new real estate developments demonstrate a 100-year water supply created strong incentives for water transfers.
|
From page 197... ...
197 al U)
|
From page 198... ...
irrigation economy in the Salt River valley after the Civil War. The Mormons colonized northern Arizona between 1873 and 1876, settled in the Salt River valley in 1877, and then began to farm along the Gila.
|
From page 199... ...
Even after the Salt River Project captured almost the entire flow of the Salt drainage, surface supplies were inadequate to support the continued high water consumption required for growth in the Phoenix metropolitan area. Colorado River water was unavailable for financial and legal reasons, except to users along the mainstream, largely near Yuma; only the federal government could have afforded to pay the immense construction and pumping costs of moving Colorado River water to the metropolitan areas.
|
From page 200... ...
Although even these early water farm purchases caused concern in their areas of origin and led to numerous lawsuits, they did not create the intense statewide controversy that bloomed when it became clear that the Ground Water Management Act would limit pumping and the CAP would not be a complete substitute source of water to support unlimited growth. These early purchases differed from recent ones in several ways (Woodard 1988~: · the land was relatively nearby; 0 the water was in the same hydrologic basin, although in different subbasins; · the water transfers were limited in scope and driven by a rela· the land was in the same county, so property tax impacts were internalized; and · the cities incorporated the purchased land into their service area, ensuring an adequate future water supply for local residents.
|
From page 201... ...
The Ground Water Management Act drove the state's transfer activities by allowing formerly prohibited transfers with few restrictions. Prior to 1980, Arizona followed the common law of ground water.
|
From page 202... ...
Collectively, irrigators have powerful property interests in federally developed surface water to complement the state-created grandfathered ground water rights recognized by the state legislature in 1980. Municipalities, as agents for the state's growing urban population, are now the dominant force in Arizona water politics, but they have carried forward the style of brokered deals to support the dominant use of water.
|
From page 203... ...
Arizona was forced to conserve its ground water when Secretary of the Interior Cecil Andrus, on behalf of the Carter administration, refused to support funding for completion of the CAP until the state took steps to reduce its ground water pumping. Governor Bruce Babbitt used the funding denial to force the three major water user interests—urban, agricultural, and miningto agree to the most stringent ground water conservation regime in the nation, the Ground Water Management Act of 1980.
|
From page 204... ...
Transfers in these first three areas, as driven by the Ground Water Management Act, are discussed first, followed by discussion of impacts in the fourth and fifth regimes. Surface and Ground Water Transfers andTheir Social and Environmental Effects The Ground Water Management Act of 1980 reflects a series of conscious water allocation choices to a much greater degree than is the case with most state water allocation legislation.
|
From page 205... ...
Water farm purchases in the late 1980s triggered intense controversy because of the large scale of the land purchases and the potential economic, social, and environmental costs. Water farming in western Arizona is possible because the CAP canal is a means of transporting water to Phoenix during dry years if space is available.
|
From page 206... ...
Although CAP contracts may be added to this base, CAP water counts only until the year 2001. As a result, the Ground Water Management Act created strong incentives for cities to purchase water farms and to transfer water from non-AMAs to AMAs because it linked new development to imported water.
|
From page 207... ...
The ranch pumps water from a large shallow aquifer supplied by the Bill Williams River and raises thousands of acres of crops. Scottsdale has had plans to increase the water reserves originally held by the Planet Ranch by acquiring an additional 75,000 acre-feet (92,510 ML)
|
From page 208... ...
If the water is piped out of the Bill Williams River, streamflows will continue to decrease. However, if the city uses the Bill Williams River to transport water back to the Colorado River and then into the CAP aqueduct, streamflows in the Bill Williams River and associated riparian values could be preserved.
|
From page 209... ...
Studies are needed to evaluate this on a case-by-case basis. Effects of Transfers of Indian Water Rights Arizona has many Indian reservations, both on the Colorado River and in central Arizona, close to Phoenix and Tucson.
|
From page 210... ...
The state's long history of preferring supply augmentation at any cost to any form of conservation has shaped the use of water transfers. Instead of a break with past allocation practices in the name of fairness and efficiency, water transfers represent the continuation of past allocation practices.
|
From page 211... ...
1990. The widening circle: The Groundwater Management Act in the context of Arizona water policy evolution.
|
From page 212... ...
1988. The Water Transfer Process in Arizona: Analysis of Impacts and Legislative Options.
|
Key Terms
This material may be derived from roughly machine-read images, and so is provided only to facilitate research.
More
information on Chapter Skim is available.