AZ • It's now a 5-city group

Tucson/tribe settlement may office water for all

MAY 9, 2006 | A major water settlement in southern Arizona may give  a tribe, a city and a mining company each the basic supplies of water they need for their respective agendas. The proposed agreement still needs approval from the judge presiding over the Gila River water rights adjudication and from the bankruptcy judge overseeing finances for ASARCO mining in the area.
The lawsuit was brought in the first place by two members of the Tohono O'odham tribe with the primary purpose of halting or limiting pumping from the Gila River by the city of Tucson.
The deal gives the Tohono O'odham tribe about 50,000 acre feet of water (mainly from the Central Arizona Project) annually.  It also gives ASARCO mining, which is active in the area, some CAP water.  And it will allow Tucson to continue some limited pumping, as long as other needs are met.
The deal evidently has backing from Governor Janet Napolitano as well as Tucson and tribal leaders. [see KVOA News 4, Tucson]

Development on the border

APRIL 14, 2006| A water conflict brewing: Leonard Mardian, developer of the Ranch at White Hills on the Arizona side of the border with Nevada, says he has secured water rights for the project that could add 20,000 residences to the area outside Kingman. He said the state Department of Water Resources so informed him earlier this week.
The catch is that those water rights run into conflict with plans by Las Vegas builder Jim Rhodes to develop an even larger projects, about six times as large, also in rural northern Arizona. [see KVOA News 4, Tucson]

Drought coordinators prepare

FEBRUARY 10, 2006 | The Arizona Drought Task Force Interagency Coordinating Group will hold its first meeting February 9 to begin assessing the need for drought preparedness.
"We've had more than 100 days without rain in the Valley," said Herb Guenther, director of the Arizona Department of Water Resources. "The seasonal outlook indicates these conditions will persist or even intensify throughout much of Arizona for an extended period of time.
"It's time to begin considering a response to drought conditions," Guenther added.
Resource officials and experts formulated a Drought Preparedness Plan in 2004. The plan calls for the interagency coordinating group to "assess, implement, and develop response options" and make recommendations to Governor Janet Napolitano on appropriate "pre-drought mitigation and adaptation."
It is composed of representatives from state and federal agencies, as well as non-governmental organizations, so that the group will provide integrated planning and response to drought for all lands - public and private - in Arizona.
The interagency group will: o Recommend to the Governor the resources needed to implement Arizona's Drought Preparedness Plan, o Coordinate and integrate drought planning and management in the state, and o Review the plan each year and recommend improvements in monitoring, implementation, and response.
The group is chaired by ADWR and the Arizona Division of Emergency Management. Contact (602) 771-8500 Herb Guenther, Director (602) 771-8430.

Norton signs water settlement agreements

JANUARY 4, 2006 | Secretary of the Interior Gale Norton has signed major water rights agreements authorized by the Arizona Water Settlements Act, an important step toward resolving critical water issues facing the state and its Indian tribes. On December 21, Norton signed the Gila River Indian Community Water Rights Settlement Agreement which confirms the Community's claim to 653,500 acre-feet of water annually, provides federal funding for water development projects, assures rights to use existing water delivery systems, and adds protections for the Community's groundwater supplies. The Secretary also signed the New Mexico Consumptive Use and Forbearance Agreement. Negotiated among Arizona parties and the federal government, the agreement allows for a water exchange so that New Mexico may obtain water from the Gila River if it decides to build a water storage and diversion structure in New Mexico. Under the Arizona Water Settlements Act, several other agreements are to be implemented, including the Southern Arizona Indian Water Rights Settlement, which resolves water rights claims of the Tohono O'odham Nation. Work on that and other settlement agreements continues. Norton thanked Senators Jon Kyl, Pete Domenici and Jeff Bingaman and Rep. J.D. Hayworth for their efforts on the Arizona Water Settlements Act and commitment to resolving these issues. The Gila River Indian Community's claims are among the largest Indian water rights claims in the West and have contributed to uncertainty over future water availability for Arizona cities, towns, utilities, industry, and agriculture. Under the Arizona Water Settlements Act, Norton was required to execute the agreements if they did not conflict with the Act. Attorneys from the Departments of the Interior and Justice worked closely with settlement parties during the past year to identify and rectify any conflicts and inconsistencies between the Act and the agreements. The Act, which President Bush signed on December 10, 2004, was the result of more than a decade of negotiations among representatives of the federal government, the states of Arizona and New Mexico, local governments, the Gila River Indian Community, the Tohono O'odham Nation and other Native American communities in the region. Contact: Dan DuBray, 202-208-6415; Pamela Williams, 202-208-1442 ','

WA • Tri-city water deal hatched

APRIL 21 | One of the most valuable pieces of property in the Olympia, Washington area is the old Olympia brewery at the neighboring city of Tumwater. It was valuable not least because of the large water rights the Olympia brewery controlled, and when that company shut the plant down, the future of those water rights became one of the region's big unanswered questions.
The buyer of the plant, All American Bottled Water, had need of a considerable supply of water, but not nearly as much as its beer-making predecessor had used.
For several weeks officials from Olympia, Tumwater and a third nearby community, Lacey, met with officials from All American, and this week released a tentative agreement. It still requires approval from city councils and from state regulators.
The agreement calls for joint purchase by the cities of all of the former brewery's water rights, with an agreed guarantee to All American to supply its water needs out of the overall supply. The cities would pay $1,750 per acre foot of water. The state Department of Ecology has estimated about 7,000 acre-feet may be available, but All American suggested the amount may be smaller. The water would be transferable in the future, and All American's right to it would rely on its use of it; failure to use it over a protracted period would lead to its forfeiture by the company.
The deall apparently puts to rest what had appeared to be a major lawsuit in the making, when the city of Olympia on February 13 filed to condemn All American's water right claims. [see the Olympia Olympian, April 22]

CO • Recreation rights stave off change

APRIL 19 | Colorado recreation groups continue to stave off agricultural attempts to throw sharp limits around the amount of water which can be held as rights for recreation purposes.
The measure sought by farm interests is Colorado Senate Bill 37, which critics say would givewater right now used for recreation - most notably kayaking - into a limited and secondary status. The measure passed the Senate, but controversy developed over the last couple of months, and the measure appears to be on hold in the House. Efforts at compromise were, however, underway by mid-April. [see the Sterling (CO) Journal-Advocate, April 18]

TAKING ON THE MEXICO CITY FORUM A guest opinion in the Cook County News Herald of Grand Marais, Minnesota, blasted the approach taken at the March Fourth World Water Forum in Mexico City which equated water rights with human rights.
"After the first day of the meeting, however, it became clear that the government and corporate agents were only interested in turning water management into a business opportunity, whereupon the NGOs and activists established an alternative forum intent on identifying access to clean water as a fundamental right . . . If we accept the position that water is a common good, and an inalienable right shared by all people, does that mean that folks in China or France have as much right to Lake Superior’s water as we do?
Perhaps we would be better served if we didn’t use the concept of human rights to justify our control of Lake Superior’s water, but rather, focused on Cibber’s observation that possession is eleven points in the law."