SLIDES: Perspectives on Water Management in Arizona

Transcription

1 University of Colorado Law School Colorado Law Scholarly Commons Innovations in Managing Western Water: New Approaches for Balancing Environmental, Social and Economic Outcomes (Martz Summer Conference, June 11-12) Getches-Wilkinson Center Conferences, Workshops, and Hot Topics SLIDES: Perspectives on Water Management in Arizona Kathy Jacobs Follow this and additional works at: Part of the Administrative Law Commons, Agriculture Law Commons, Aquaculture and Fisheries Commons, Environmental Law Commons, Environmental Policy Commons, Government Contracts Commons, Hydrology Commons, Indian and Aboriginal Law Commons, Natural Resources and Conservation Commons, Natural Resources Law Commons, Natural Resources Management and Policy Commons, Public Policy Commons, State and Local Government Law Commons, Sustainability Commons, Technology and Innovation Commons, Urban Studies and Planning Commons, Water Law Commons, and the Water Resource Management Commons Citation Information Jacobs, Kathy, "SLIDES: Perspectives on Water Management in Arizona" (2015). Innovations in Managing Western Water: New Approaches for Balancing Environmental, Social and Economic Outcomes (Martz Summer Conference, June 11-12). Reproduced with permission of the Getches-Wilkinson Center for Natural Resources, Energy, and the Environment (formerly the Natural Resources Law Center) at the University of Colorado Law School.

2 Perspectives on Water Management in Arizona Innovations in Managing Western Water Boulder Colorado June 11, 2015 Kathy Jacobs University of Arizona Director, Center for Climate Adaptation Science and Solutions Dept. of Soil, Water and Environmental Science

3 Tensions in Water Management Regulation vs. Incentives Conservation vs. Augmentation Certainty vs. Flexibility Equity vs. Complexity Science vs. Politics Long vs. Short-term Perspectives Local vs. Larger Scale Solutions Market vs. Non-market Solutions Performance vs Prescriptive Approaches Focused vs. Comprehensive (IWRM) Solutions Resources!

4 Lessons: The Importance of Context In Water Management

5 Much of the west depends on groundwater. Mining groundwater leads to Lowering of groundwater levels Higher pumping costs and well deepening Impacts on surrounding wells Poorer water quality Impacts on riparian areas Subsidence of the land surface Concerns about economic future of the state Radar interferogram, Tucson, 1997 to 2000

6 Central Arizona Project Colorado River Little Colorado River Central Arizona Project $3.6 billion 1.5 MAF capacity (1850 MCM) 336 miles long (540 km) 2,900 ft. vertical lift (0.9 km) Colorado River $ $ $ $ Verde River $ $ Phoenix Salt River Total AZ Allocation Colorado River = 2.8 MAF Total CAP allocation = 1.58 MAF Gila River Tucson $ $ $$ $ $$ Santa Cruz River San Pedro River

7 The 1980 Groundwater Management Act Established ADWR, statewide requirements, and AMAs & INAs Set long-range water management goals (related to Safe Yield) Established GW rights system AMAs: Groundwater rights and permits Well metering, annual reports and fees Mandatory conservation for large users 100 year assured water supply for subdivisions No new agriculture (with exceptions)

8 AMA Groundwater Management Plans: Mandatory Conservation Five plans between 1980 and 2025 Increasingly stringent requirements for municipal water providers, farmers, large industrial users (mines, golf courses, electric power, etc). Long-range projections of supply/demand Augmentation, water quality Assistance, monitoring programs Courtesy ADWR

9 Assured Water Supply Program No new subdivisions without a 100 year supply Must be legally, physically and continuously available, Adequate quality for proposed use, Meet conservation standards Demonstrate financial capability Consistency with the management goal = required use of renewable supplies

10 Why is the Assured/Adequate Water Supply Program so Important? It focuses on the fastest growing sector And on the sector with the greatest ability to pay In AMAs, it drives demand for renewable supplies and protects higher quality, more reliable groundwater for future use It requires long-term planning but allows for incremental adjustments

11 Arizona s Historic Excess Water Problem In 1993, CAP was substantially complete, but Ag districts took less than expected Municipal demand not yet built out Underutilization caused high O&M rates Concerns about protecting Arizona s allocation Solutions: Expansion of Recharge and Recovery Provisions (1994) Central AZ Groundwater Replenishment District (1993) Arizona Water Banking Authority (1996) Bad timing relative to mandatory conservation requirements?

12 The Central Arizona Groundwater Replenishment District Created in 1993 to support the new Assured Water Supply Rules Replenishes aquifers in the 3 AMAs where its customers pump groundwater Is controversial because it recharges in different locations from where pumpage occurs (though a 2014 Recovery Plan and recovery criteria address some of these issues) And because it in theory facilitates sprawl

13 Increasing Complexity is Unavoidable, but what are the consequences? Example: AWS Demonstration for CAGRD Member Land 1. Subdivision developer applies to ADWR for Certificate of Assured Water Supply 2. Provider pumps groundwater and serves it to homeowner 3. Provider reports total water use to ADWR, and individual homeowner water use to CAGRD 4. CAGRD reports homeowner s replenishment assessment to County Assessor 5. Assessor collects assessment on property tax bill, and sends money to CAGRD Facility Operator Recharge Basin CAWS ADWR CAGRD CAWCD CAP Water County Assessor Subdivision Home Water Provider Groundwater 6. CAGRD arranges with CAWCD to deliver CAP water to recharge facility permitted by ADWR 7. Recharge Facility Operator reports deliveries to ADWR, which calculates recharge credits 8. ADWR reports credits to CAGRD, which uses credits to meet homeowner s replenishment Adapted from Ken Seasholes, CAP

14 Arizona Water Banking Authority Put excess CAP water to immediate use Protect Arizona s Colorado River allocation Ensure reliable municipal deliveries Support management goals of the AMAs Support Indian Water Rights Settlements Provide for Interstate Banking with Nevada and California

15 AWBA s Contribution to CAP Use Courtesy Ken Seasholes, CAP 14

16 AWBA Storage 1,662,882 AF Lessons learned: Arizona s Recharge and Recovery Program is highly successful Phoenix AMA 1,379,191 AF Reparations Indian Firming Interstate General Fund Withdrawal Fee 4-cent tax Pinal AMA Tucson AMA 648,325 AF AWBA credits 1997 through 2014 Source: AWBA 2014 Annual Report Courtesy Ken Seasholes, CAP

17 Water Budget Lessons: CONSISTENT DATA AVAILABILITY IS A CRITICAL COMPONENT OF WATER MANAGEMENT And THE ASSUMPTIONS THAT UNDERLIE THESE NUMBERS MUST BE TRANSPARENT And THIS IS A LOT OF WORK!

18 Groundwater Pumping AFFECTS SURFACE FLOWS! Who knew? Robin Silver The GWMA does not protect riparian areas inside OR outside AMAs Upper San Pedro Basin in SE Arizona

19 Arizona Surface Water/Groundwater Management Achievements Major strides have been made by the State and its water management partners in securing water supplies for the AMAs: Groundwater Management/Conservation Watershed-based Management/Stakeholder Engagement Central Arizona Project/CAGRD Underground Storage and Recovery Arizona Water Banking Authority Assured Water Supply Program Drought Planning Colorado River Management

20 Unresolved Water Management Issues in Arizona Achieving safe-yield and then maintaining it Low priority of CAP water supplies Environmental sustainability: no protection for riparian areas or environmental flows generally Groundwater vs. surface water management Rural issues: Geography of supply vs demand; lack of resources for new infrastructure Expansion of agriculture in southeastern Arizona is causing groundwater levels to plummet Historically one of the highest state population growth rates in the country State economic issues and political support And then, there s climate change

21 Water Supply Impacts in the Southwest The Southwestern US is expected to get dryer as well as warmer * The wet areas will get wetter, The dry areas will get drier *Climate change has not been explicitly addressed in Arizona s water management process Projected Precipitation by Season (CMIP 5) (NCA3)

22 Adaptive Capacity of Institutions Adaptive management has its limitations. It is expensive, It requires professional judgment, It is data intensive, It requires management at multiple time scales but you to can t acknowledge have static, lagged prescriptive effects. management in response to dynamic conditions

23 Lessons Learned: Don t Ignore the Human Factors in Water Management Program effectiveness is directly related to the quality of leadership and staff of responsible agencies Regulations are only as good as the quality of the implementation; implementation costs money Monitoring and assessment on an ongoing basis are critical to knowing whether you are making progress Nothing about water management is easy if the answer is simple it is likely to be wrong!

24 Maybe Arizona has done something right? Groundwater Storage Trends J. S. Famiglietti and M. Rodell, Water in the Balance, Science, 340, 1300 (2013) Courtesy Ken Seasholes, CAP

25 Water Production for Tucson Water Service Area Water Production for TW Service Area (Acre-Feet) 140, , ,000 80,000 60,000 40,000 20,000 Total Potable Water Use at 1987 Level Groundwater Use at 1941 Level Reclaimed Water CAP TARP Groundwater Potable Production CAP Production TARP Production Reclaimed Production Courtesy Tucson Water

26 Kathy Jacobs, Director Center for Climate Adaptation Science and Solutions 845 N. Park Ave Suite 535 University of Arizona Tucson, AZ