Adriel Heisey, a photographer...

� � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � ��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

Photo donated and copyrighted by Adriel Heisey, a photographer based in northern Arizona. More information about his work is available at www.adrielheisey.com.

2 • January/February 2005 • Southwest Hydrology

January/February 2005 • Southwest Hydrology • 3


> > > > > > > > >

Departments

6 On the Ground On the Ground• Maintaining flow in the Rio Grande• Yaqui Valley groundwater use

9 HydroFacts

10 Government Government• Arizona’s water future• CALFED passed• Friant Dam ruled illegal• Nevada to bank water in Cal• NM water company valued

27 People• Rabbon leads flood group• Water pioneer Stuart dies

29 The Society Page• NWRA fall symposia• AWWA’s Stories from the Road• GRAC fall seminars

30 Around the Globe• New WHO drinking water guidelines

31 Company Line• Golder’s ABQ office• Transwest Geochem’s new lab• DBS&A management• Waterloo introduces FEFLOW

32 Business Directory and Employment Opportunities

33 R&D• Sandia’s hydroponic forage• Water scarcity impacts global business• Air pollution reduces snowfall

36 In PrintCommon Waters, Diverging Streams reviewed by Jim Holway

38 The Calendar Meetings, conferences, training, and short courses

A bimonthly trade magazine for hydrologists, water managers, and other professionals working with water issues.

Inside This Issue

Vertical aerial view of the northeast corner of Rancho Vistoso, near Tucson, Arizona, where it adjoins the virgin Sonoran Desert. Photo donated and copyrighted by Adriel Heisey, a photographer based in northern Arizona. More information about his work is available at www.adrielheisey.com.

In this issue, we tackle the slippery subject of sustainability. In nearly every meeting In this issue, we tackle the slippery subject of sustainability. In nearly every meeting of water professionals I’ve attended in the past few years, the “s” word has come up in several talks, and sometimes is the focus of a session or even entire meeting. Yet after listening to all this talk on the subject, what has become most clear is that “sustainability” does not mean the same thing to every person or group. What exactly is being sustained? Water supplies? Growth? Ecosystems? Agriculture? For whom? For how long? Who is making these decisions, and what groups are being represented? The ongoing drought in the West has heightened our awareness that water resources are finite – and in high demand. The goal of sustainability requires us to make choices about how best to allocate our limited resources. This issue’s feature articles make the point that sustainability is neither a simple concept nor a simple management goal…but that nevertheless, management entities are moving forward to define the concept for themselves in order to enact long-range planning.

We introduce a new item in this issue: HydroFacts, a list of remarkable water-related statistics. Check them out on page 9, and feel free to send us your own HydroFacts, with their source.

Thanks to all contributors to this issue, and as always, we encourage you to send in your news and ideas for articles.

Betsy WoodhousePublisher


Sustainability in an Era of LimitsOur population is growing. We’re in a drought. Water supplies are dwindling. If water were plentiful for all people and ecosystems, sustainability would not be the hot issue it is. But we live in an era of limits, and water resources are among the shortest resources in supply. Our groundwater reserves are being mined. Management for sustainable water resources calls for using our water resources to address present needs without compromising future needs. But do we really know when and how the impacts of our activities on water resources today will be felt in the future? Do we know what future needs, values, and supplies will be? How can we best manage for now and the future? Adaptive management may be the best approach we have, but it doesn’t solve everything. Our articles explain…

> > > > > > > > >

14 Why Sustainability is Not a Four-Letter WordKatharine Jacobs andBarbara Morehouse

The word “sustainability” has acquired value-laden and political overtones that cause reactions from many quarters. Yet the objectives of sustainability may benefit even the skeptics. States such as Arizona are moving toward managing for sustainable water resources. What is needed to achieve that?

16 Time Scales in the Sustainable Management of Water Resources Colleen Filippone and Stanley A. Leake

Many human activities affect water-resources systems, but the time scales over which the consequences of those activities are felt can be decades or centuries. If we wish to manage water resources sustainably, these time scales must be considered.

18 Sustaining Groundwater Resources: California’s Shift Toward More Effective Groundwater Management

Vicki Kretsinger and T.N. Narasimhan

The sustainability concept encompasses beneficial use of groundwater for present and future generations while guarding against unacceptable consequences from such use. But defining what is “unacceptable” is a challenge to be faced in the shift to more integrated, adaptive water management approaches.

20 Cultural Perspectives: The Land-Based Community Looks at Sustainability Chris Garcia

Market-based communities, a relatively recent social invention, view land and labor as commodities separate from nature and people. More traditional, land-based communities link the health, past, and future of people to the health, past, and future of the place. By again recognizing and valuing the interdependence of humans and the natural environment, we can achieve a balanced outlook on long-term, sustainable practices.

22 Here Today, Gone Tomorrow? NGWA Initiatives on Groundwater SustainabilityChris Reimer

The National Ground Water Association has been working to bridge the knowledge gap between water professionals and federal policymakers to help guide federal actions to benefit groundwater management. NGWA has now identified several key contributors to groundwater shortages.

24 The Edwards Aquifer: Working Toward Sustainable Water ManagementGeary M. Schindel and Rick Illgner

The Edwards Aquifer Authority is tasked with issuing water permits to provide water to nearly 1.7 million people, their industries, and agriculture, but the volume of water claimed by those with historic rights exceeds targeted withdrawal from the aquifer. At the same time, the aquifer supports a number of endangered and protected species. What will give?

Publishing Southwest Hydrology furthers SAHRA’s mission of promoting sustainable management of water resources in semi-arid regions.

This material is based upon work supported by SAHRA (Sustainability of semi-Arid Hydrology and Riparian Areas) under the STC Program of the National Science Foundation, Agreement No. EAR-9876800. Any opinions, findings, and conclusions or recommendations expressed in this material are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of SAHRA or of the National Science Foundation.

Southwest HydrologyPublisher

Betsy Woodhouse

Technical EditorHoward Grahn

EditorMary Black

Art DirectorKyle Carpenter

Knowledge TransferGary Woodard

Contributors

Advisory BoardPeggy Barroll, Ph.D.

Marvin F. Glotfelty, R.G.Jeff Johnson

David Jordan, P.E.Stanley Leake, Ph.D.

Mario Lluria, Ph.D., P.E.Kevin McGillicuddy

Ari M. Michelsen, Ph.D.Martin G. Steinpress, R.G., C.HG

Printed in the USA by Arizona Lithographers

Southwest Hydrology is published six times per year by the NSF Center for Sustainability of semi-Arid Hydrology and

Riparian Areas (SAHRA), College of Engineering, The University of Arizona. Copyright 2004 by the Arizona Board of Regents. All rights reserved. Limited copies may be made for internal use only. Credit must be given to the publisher. Otherwise, no part of this publication may be reproduced without prior

written permission of the publisher.ISSN 1552-8383

SubscriptionsSubscriptions to Southwest Hydrology are free. To receive the Southwest Hydrology are free. To receive the Southwest Hydrology

magazine, contact us as shown below.

AdvertisingAdvertising rates, sizes, and contracts are available at

www.swhydro.arizona.edu. Please direct ad inquiries to us as shown below. Space must be reserved 50 days prior to

publication date.

Job AnnouncementsSouthwest Hydrology will publish job announcements in the Southwest Hydrology will publish job announcements in the Southwest HydrologyEmployment Opportunities section. The first 70 words for

each announcement is free; after that, the charge is $70 per additional 70 words. To place an ad, contact us as shown below. All announcements, of any length, will be posted on

our Web site for no charge (www.swhydro.arizona.edu).

Editorial ContributionSouthwest Hydrology welcomes letters and contributions Southwest Hydrology welcomes letters and contributions Southwest Hydrology

of news, project summaries, product announcements, and items for The Calendar. Send submissions by mail or email as

shown below. Visit www.swhydro.arizona.edu for additional guidelines for submissions.

Web SitesSouthwest Hydrology - www.swhydro.arizona.eduSouthwest Hydrology - www.swhydro.arizona.eduSouthwest Hydrology

Brad James, WebmasterSAHRA - www.sahra.arizona.edu

CONTACT USSouthwest Hydrology, The University of Arizona, SAHRA,

PO Box 210158-B, Tucson, AZ 85721-0158. Phone 520-626-1805. Email [email protected].

Lee AddamsColleen Filippone

Chris GarciaJim HolwayRick Illgner

Katharine JacobsVicki Kretsinger

Stanley LeakeBarbara Morehouse

T.N. NarasimhanChris Reimer

Geary SchindelChris Stageman


Maintaining the Rio Grande-Elephant Butte Connection Chris Stageman – New Mexico Interstate Stream Commission

The New Mexico Interstate Stream Commission (NMISC) is excavating and maintaining a temporary channel through the delta and exposed sediment bottom of Elephant Butte Reservoir to help maintain flow through the system. Since 1999, drought has reduced inflow to Elephant Butte Reservoir and the reservoir has receded south more than 18 miles, exposing a delta of mud, water, and skeleton salt cedar trees. A large annual sediment load, low river slope, and invasive phreatophytes choke the river in the delta area and inhibit conveyance of water and sediment across the delta into the active reservoir pool. With downstream irrigators calling for full annual deliveries, the NMISC and the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation (USBR), through an annual cooperative program, are working to keep the river channel connected to the reservoir pool.

The temporary channel is an engineered feature constructed of soil in the reservoir bottom. Channel dimensions range from

roughly 150 to 300 feet wide by three to five feet deep. The channel spoil levees are from three to more than five feet high. The project is in a remote area with limited access, roughly 45 miles south of Socorro, New Mexico. Extreme working conditions require the use of specialized heavy equipment designed to

work in marshes and swamps. The photo above shows two amphibious excavators owned and operated by Wilco Marsh Buggies Inc. of Louisiana constructing the temporary channel.

The USBR is presently maintaining Phase 1 of the project, a seven-mile segment of the temporary channel at the upper end. NMISC’s contractor is currently maintaining Phase 2, a section about 11 miles long located downstream from Phase 1. Phase 3, scheduled for construction in early 2005, will extend the channel further downstream to the active reservoir pool (see map next page). In the Phase 3 reach, a poorly defined, meandering natural channel will be maintained, excavated, and straightened as necessary to improve conveyance of water and sediments into the reservoir. The overall length of Phase 3 will depend on hydrologic conditions, but is expected to be three to seven miles.

The temporary channel is critical to the water supply and for meeting Rio Grande Compact obligations to Texas. An excavated and maintained pilot channel reduces water losses due to evaporation

Engineers, Geologists, EnvironmentalScientists, and Decision Analysts

Costa Mesa, CA (949) 642-0245Scottsdale, AZ (480) 348-1283Please visit for career opportunities - EOE

www.geomatrix.com

Regional Groundwater Studies

Water Resources Engineering

Groundwater Modeling

Watershed Management

Subsidence Analysis/Geohazard Evaluations

Conjunctive Use

Water Quality Evaluations

Environmental Assessments

ON THE GROUND

“Marsh buggies” or amphibious excavators, clear the channel through Elephant Butte Reservoir.


and riparian evapotranspiration. Preliminary calculations of total water salvage with the channel in place versus no channel indicate that depletions are reduced on the order of 600 to 1,000 acre-feet annually per mile of channel. If the current drought persists, such water savings will become increasingly important.

This project is important to the citizens of New Mexico and is being undertaken by the NMISC for several reasons:

• New Mexico’s Rio Grande Compact deliveries to Texas are measured at Elephant Butte Reservoir.

• Lack of usable Rio Grande Project water affects New Mexico’s ability to store water in upstream reservoirs constructed after 1929 (Article VII of the Rio Grande Compact).

• The interruption between the river and the reservoir in the 1950s contributed to New Mexico’s significant accrued debit pursuant to the Compact. The Rio Grande became disconnected from the reservoir by a distance of approximately 30 miles during that time, resulting in large water losses and unmet Compact obligations. Since then, channel work has been ongoing to maintain a connection to the reservoir during periods of low project storage.

• Water savings generated by the pilot channel benefits the Elephant Butte Irrigation District, which is entitled to 57 percent of the Rio Grande Project supply released from the reservoir.

• The pilot channel project also benefits recreational water users at Elephant Butte by facilitating delivery of water to the reservoir.

For more information, contact Chris Stageman at [email protected].

Left: Elephant Butte panorama (photo by James Hogan). Below: Location of temporary channels. Inset: Shrinking Elephant Butte (center) and Caballo (bottom) reservoir levels, 1999-2002. Photos taken in October each year.

Approximate location of Elephant Butte active reservoir pool

Approximate alignment of ISC contractor constructed temporary channel (~11 mi.)

Lower portion of USBR-constructed temporary channel (~7 mi.)


Evaluating Increased Groundwater Use in the Yaqui Valley, Mexico Lee Addams, Ph.D. – International Research Institute for Climate Prediction, Columbia University

Irrigated agriculture currently accounts for 77 percent of global water withdrawals, with that figure rising to 90 percent in developing countries. Although irrigated agriculture currently represents less than 20 percent of total farmland, it contributes 40 percent to the world’s total food production (World Bank, 2004). Providing enough water for agriculture requires more efficient use of existing surface water and groundwater. In addition, innovative and reliable management solutions to improve the efficiency and dependability of water systems will be crucial for maintaining the food supply from irrigated agriculture (Rosegrant et al., 2002).

The Yaqui Valley, a semi-arid, irrigated

coastal plain in Sonora, Mexico, approximately 500 miles south of the Arizona border (see map), provides

much of the wheat grown in Mexico. During the past seven years, however, a severe drought has reduced Yaqui River discharge, with significant economic consequences for the agriculture that is dependent upon it. Although National Water Commission planners are separately working on improved, long-term operating rules for reservoir management, local farmers in the irrigation district are beginning to turn to groundwater and have secured international funding to effectively double the well capacity through new drilling (La Tribunadrilling (La Tribunadrilling ( , 2003).

In principle, increasing the use of Yaqui Valley groundwater as a buffer to surface water variability seems like a good idea. In contrast to neighboring agricultural regions to the north and south (and much of the arid southwestern United States), the Yaqui Valley historically has underutilized groundwater resources because of the normally plentiful surface water supply of the river. Prior to the recent drought, Yaqui River water used for agriculture averaged 2,619 million cubic meters (MCM) (2.1 million acre-feet) per year compared with only 225 MCM (182 acre-feet) per year of groundwater, about 8 percent of the total.

Map of the Yaqui River Basin, northwestern Mexico. The basin encompasses 72,000 km2 in two Mexican states (Sonora and Chihuahua).

ON THE GROUND (continued)


To evaluate the potential benefits of increased groundwater use in the Yaqui Valley, an integrated hydrologic-economic-agronomic modeling framework was developed by researchers at Stanford University. The management model framework represented crop and water decision-making by farm subunits of the irrigation district as well as water distribution and well pumping decision-making by the irrigation district. Eight crops were available to each module, with the three major crops (wheat, maize, and safflower) also modeled for yield response to water and salinity. A spatially explicit groundwater flow model and a canal network simulator are linked to the management models. The economics of crop prices and production costs, including energy costs for pumping, significantly influence agricultural decision-making in this area and are also integrated into the modeling framework. Since surface water is essentially free for the irrigation district, the price of district-provided water depends on both the fraction of groundwater used by the district and the pumping costs that must be passed along to farmers.

The model was run using the two-level management-modeling framework to predict groundwater use behavior over the drought period from 1995 to 2003. Initial results showed that farmers would indeed use more well capacity to supplement declining reservoir allocations. However, even though total modeled extractions are “sustainable” in a resource sense, the model also showed that during years of extremely low surface-water availability, the cumulative groundwater drawdown resulted in exceptionally high pumping costs (and therefore water prices) during the “critical year.” Only high-value crops (citrus and vegetables) could be profitably grown during such a situation. Using this insight, policy makers and lenders can consider the secondary economic assistance that may be needed to support crop diversification in the valley before drilling more wells. From

these preliminary results, the model will be extended to answer related “what-if” scenarios of proposed infrastructure change, such as canal lining, as well as climatic variations.

Contact Lee Addams at [email protected]. Visit yaquivalley.stanford.edu for more information on research in the Yaqui Valley.

References.................................La Tribuna, “Autorizan 70 Mdd al Distrito de Riego,”

May 12, 2003.

Rosegrant, M.W., X. Cai, and S.A. Cline, 2002. World Water and Food to 2025: Dealing with Scarcity. Washington, D.C., International Food Policy Research Institute.

World Bank, 2004. Water Resources Sector Strategy: Strategic Directions for World Bank Engagement. Washington, D.C., World Bank.

Historical reservoir inflows (net runoff) for the Yaqui River Basin, 1955-2002. The most recent drought started in 1996.

Southwest Hydrology HydroFactsIncrease in the cost of all goods and services in U.S., 1980-2003: 97%Increase in the cost of water and sewer services in U.S., 1980-2003: 175%

Budget for NOAA’s 2004 climate change research program: $70 millionBudget for 2004 climate change movie, “The Day After Tomorrow”: $125 million

Maximum number of typhoons ever to hit Japan in one season prior to 2004: 7Number of typhoons that hit Japan during 2004: 10

Fraction of water news articles, Aug. ‘01 to Oct. ‘04, from Africa containing the word “sustainable”: 1 in 22Fraction of water news articles, Aug. ‘01 to Oct. ‘04, from U.S. containing the word “sustainable”: 1 in 200

Average annual population growth rate for U.S., 1970-2002: 1.1%Average annual population growth rate for Albuquerque, Tucson, Phoenix and Las Vegas metropolitan areas: 1.9%, 2.9%, 3.9%, and 5.5%, respectively.

Gallons of water used to refine one gallon of crude oil: 44Gallons of water used to manufacture one car, including tires: 39,090


EPA’s Remediation Database Web Site StreamlinedIn August 2004, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s improved Remediation and Characterization Innovative Technology (REACHIT) database was released on the Internet. It contains major upgrades to the earlier version, including new search options that streamline the process of finding characterization or remediation technologies for a particular remediation problem set. Information associated with the more than 450 technology vendors and 700 technologies in REACHIT has been thoroughly updated. New features also include: one-click searches on topics of interest to the remediation community (the “Spotlight” section), the most commonly searched technologies and contaminants, and user-created queries; faster searches for specific vendors, technology trade names, and sites with alphabetical indexes; one-click downloading of search results in a spreadsheet format; and a summary of REACHIT data in the “Information Snapshots” section.

Visit www.epareachit.org.

EPA Report Backs Submetering for Conservation Article originally appeared in Water Tech Online, Sept. 8, 2004

Municipalities and policy makers seeking incentives to improve water conservation should embrace direct water billing by the apartment industry, according to a new study produced in cooperation with the EPA, 10 municipal water utilities, and two national apartment associations.

The National Multiple Family Submetering and Allocation Billing Program Study results were released recently by the National Multi Housing Council/National Apartment Association Joint Legislative Program. The study was a three-year effort to determine the potential water savings in the apartment sector if residents were required to pay for

their water consumption separately from rent. It found that billing residents for their water usage by direct metering could reduce annual water consumption by an average of 15 percent.

The research, conducted by Aquacraft of Boulder, Colorado under the direction of Dick Bennett of the East Bay (California) Municipal Utility District, found that 85 percent of apartment properties still include water in the rent, the release said. This suggests that a huge conservation potential exists if utilities use their avoided costs to provide incentives to property owners to upgrade plumbing fixtures and implement direct billing programs.

The report states that “direct metering and billing of water for apartment residents encourages water efficiency and promotes a water billing system as transparent as other utilities like gas, electricity, phone, and cable, whereby residents pay for what they use.”

The full report can be found at www.nmhc.org/Content/ServeContent.cfm?ContentItemID=3242. See also www.watertechonline.com.

Town Hall Studies Arizona’s Water FutureArizona’s 85th Town Hall convened in early November to discuss the state’s water future. The Town Hall is an independent, nonprofit membership organization that twice yearly identifies a critical issue facing Arizona and brings together a diverse field of experts to discuss it. Outcomes of the meetings are not binding, but they do provide focus on the most critical aspects of a given issue and recommend actions. This year’s meeting was attended by 177 invitees representing business and industry; municipalities; local, state, and federal agencies; academia; law firms; and non-governmental organizations.

Governor Janet Napolitano addressed the group on the first day, emphasizing the need for greater water conservation in Arizona, which she initiated by mandating

a five percent reduction in water use by all state agencies. She also outlined the creation of a “virtual water university” to consolidate and coordinate water expertise and water-related research and technology development at Arizona’s three primary state universities.

The strongest recommendation in the final report of the town hall was to secure funding for the state’s Department of Water Resources, which has been hamstrung by severe budget cuts in recent legislative sessions. The report also urged help for rural areas juggling growth and limited water supplies. Conservation was encouraged through a variety of means, including a recommendation to price water so as to reflect its true long-term cost.

Additional recommendations included operating the never-used Yuma Desalting Plant, protecting natural resources, resolving outstanding Indian water claims, improving seniority levels of Colorado River claims, exploring water exchanges within the state and with tribes, improved flood management, and preserving a quantity of the agricultural water supply to act as a water resource buffer during extreme droughts.

Visit www.aztownhall.org.

CALFED Legislation PassedFrom the U.S. Department of the Interior

On October 25, President Bush signed legislation authorizing $389 million for the Water Supply Reliability and Environmental Improvement Act, popularly known as CALFED. The legislation provides federal authorization for a long-term collaborative plan for environmental restoration and enhancement of the San Francisco Bay/Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta estuary, and for needed improvements in California water supplies, flood control, and water quality.

The largest and most comprehensive water-management plan in the nation, CALFED is a partnership of 24 California

GOVERNMENT


and federal agencies and representatives of California’s environmental, urban, and agricultural communities. CALFED agencies have spent $1 billion over the last decade to improve the ecological health of the Bay-Delta watershed by restoring and protecting habitat and enhancing the environment for fisheries and wetlands. The CALFED program includes efforts to recover species listed under the state and federal endangered species acts.

The legislation also will drive forward state and federal efforts to modernize California’s water-management infrastructure. CALFED is pursuing the construction of new water storage reservoirs, groundwater storage programs, water recycling, and conservation programs. In addition, the CALFED program contains many elements to assist Southern California in reducing use of Colorado River water.

Visit www.doi.gov.

Friant Dam Ruled Illegal Article originally appeared in Water Tech Online, Aug. 30, 2004

A federal judge has ruled that the U.S. government violated California law when it built the Friant Dam to divert San Joaquin River water 60 years ago, The San Diego Union-Tribune reported.

The decision of U.S. District Court Judge Lawrence K. Karlton could settle a 16-year-old water dispute, the paper reported. Karlton ruled in favor of environmentalists who sued the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation and the Friant Water Users Authority in 1988 over the dam.

In the lawsuit, the Natural Resources Defense Council and other environmental groups charged that the defendants violated state law by failing to release enough water to sustain the surrounding environment and wildlife, the article said.

The San Joaquin River had supported spawning Chinook salmon and other fish

before the Bureau of Reclamation built the Friant Dam in the 1940s. The water now collects in Millerton Lake and supplies about 15,000 farmers and other water-users. As a result, this ruling will have a direct impact on those water customers, according to the report.

The Bureau of Reclamation declined to comment until its attorneys had a chance to review the judge’s decision, spokesman Jeff McCracken said in the article.

The Friant Water Users Authority, which provides Friant Dam water to Fresno, Kern, Madera, Merced and Tulare counties, was “very disappointed“ in the ruling, general manager Ron Jacobsma told the paper, and added that its attorneys were considering various legal options.

Visit www.watertechonline.com.

CA Water Issues to be Handled by EnvironmentalistCalifornia state senator Sheila Kuehl of Santa Monica, “one of California’s most outspoken environmentalists,” according to The Bakersfield Californian, will chair the committee that will handle water legislation in the California Senate.

Kuehl heads the Natural Resources and Wildlife Committee, under which state water legislation will now fall, according to a November announcement by president-elect of the Senate, Don Perata, as reported in the paper. Water legislation had previously been handled by the Agriculture and Water Committee.

Environmentalists were reportedly pleased with the move, while many farmers and water officials were dismayed. The decision was viewed a slap in the face to the California Farm Bureau Federation.

Visit www.bakersfield.com.

Nevada to Bank Water in SoCalIn October, the boards of directors of the Metropolitan Water District of Southern

California and the Southern Nevada Water Authority (SNWA) approved an agreement that will allow Southern Nevada to store a portion of its annual Colorado River water in Southern California until it is needed. The agreement “offers a model for the type of interstate cooperation and goodwill needed to help the West cope with the sting of historic droughts along the Colorado River,” said Metropolitan Chairman Philip J. Pece.

Patricia Mulroy, general manager of SNWA, said the agreement would allow the Las Vegas-area water agency to maximize the success of the extraordinary conservation effort taking place in its region by providing another option to store its river supplies until needed.

Under the agreement among Metropolitan, SNWA, the Colorado River Commission of Nevada, and the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation (USBR), SNWA can store a portion of its Colorado River apportionment in Metropolitan’s Southern California aquifer storage facilities.

In future years, SNWA can recall up to 30,000 acre-feet of water annually from the storage account. With six months’ prior notice from SNWA, Metropolitan would reduce its Colorado River order to create the unused apportionment for USBR to deliver to Southern Nevada.

“This agreement will provide Southern California with additional Colorado River water in years when there is space available in our aqueduct system to take it,” said Metropolitan then-Chief Executive Officer Ronald R. Gastelum. “It will also help us manage the quality of our imported water by giving us more Colorado River water supplies to blend with our water from Northern California.”

The Las Vegas Review-Journal pointed The Las Vegas Review-Journal pointed The Las Vegas Review-Journalout an additional benefit of the agreement: lower cost compared to storing water in its own groundwater replenishment system, the Southern Nevada Groundwater Bank. SNWA currently spends about $280 per acre foot to extract water from Lake


Mead, treat it to drinking water standards, transfer it to the injection wells, and then inject it into the aquifer. In contrast, “there will be no costs incurred or paid to Metropolitan for banking this water for us,” Mulroy said.

Visit www.mwdh2o.com and www.snwa.com.

Santa Fe County, City Reach Water AgreementU.S. Water News Online reported in October that a “historic” agreement had been reached on a water-sharing project between Santa Fe County and the city of Santa Fe, New Mexico. Each entity will share 50 percent in the ownership of a Rio Grande water diversion project, including splitting the initial $60 million for design and construction, and dividing the rest of the expected total $120 million cost not covered by state or federal sources, said the report.

For the city of Santa Fe, which was forced to implement water restrictions during the drought in recent years, this project is an important move toward a regional water system.

The project calls for diverting water directly from the Rio Grande by 2008, according to U.S. Water News. Santa Fe County will be allowed to take 1,700 acre-feet per year in addition to the 500 acre-feet per year it now buys from the city. In addition, the county, in consultation with the city, will be

able to permit and drill wells within the Santa Fe basin.

Visit www.uswaternews.com.

NM Water Company Valued at $11 Million

How much does a water company cost? In the community of Eldorado, near Santa Fe, New Mexico, an eight-day trial was necessary to determine the fair market value of the privately owned Eldorado Utilities Inc., reported The[Santa Fe] New Mexican. The publicly elected Eldorado Area Water and Sanitation District is considering taking the water company by condemnation, but cost is an issue. The company serves 2,800 customers over 30 square miles.

At the crux of the cost deliberation was whether the utility should be valued according to the cost of its separate parts – pipes, wells, reservoirs, land, water rights – or according to what the whole system would sell for in an open market, said the paper. In 2003, Eldorado Utilities was willing to sell the system to Utilities Inc., a utility conglomerate, for $6.3 million. However, The New Mexican reported that when the water district offered to purchase the system for $6.2 million early in 2004, AMREP, who built and owns the system, declined. AMREP instead argued that, according to the value of its parts, the cost should be more than $13 million.

According to the paper, a business valuation expert testified the water system cannot be taken apart and thus must be valued as a whole system and based on market value. When compared with the sale price of other water companies in New Mexico, he said, the market value of the system is $6.8 million.

Jurors were influenced, however, by AMREP’s argument that the utility has greater value than the $6.8 million because it is a going concern, reported The New Mexican, and their final verdict of $11 million reflected that intangible value.

In September, when this decision was made, the water district was uncertain whether it would try to proceed with the condemnation or appeal the decision, said the paper.

Visit www.sfnewmexican.com.

GOVERNMENT (continued)

�Website: www.inmtn.comWebsite: www.inmtn.comWebsite: www.inmtn.comWebsite: www.inmtn.comWebsite: www.inmtn.comWebsite: www.inmtn.comWebsite: www.inmtn.comWebsite: www.inmtn.comWebsite: www.inmtn.comWebsite: www.inmtn.comWebsite: www.inmtn.comWebsite: www.inmtn.comWebsite: www.inmtn.comWebsite: www.inmtn.comWebsite: www.inmtn.comWebsite: www.inmtn.comWebsite: www.inmtn.comWebsite: www.inmtn.comWebsite: www.inmtn.comWebsite: www.inmtn.comWebsite: www.inmtn.comWebsite: www.inmtn.comWebsite: www.inmtn.comWebsite: www.inmtn.comWebsite: www.inmtn.comWebsite: www.inmtn.comWebsite: www.inmtn.comWebsite: www.inmtn.comWebsite: www.inmtn.comWebsite: www.inmtn.comWebsite: www.inmtn.comWebsite: www.inmtn.comWebsite: www.inmtn.comWebsite: www.inmtn.comWebsite: www.inmtn.comWebsite: www.inmtn.comWebsite: www.inmtn.comWebsite: www.inmtn.comWebsite: www.inmtn.comWebsite: www.inmtn.comWebsite: www.inmtn.comWebsite: www.inmtn.comWebsite: www.inmtn.comWebsite: www.inmtn.comWebsite: www.inmtn.comWebsite: www.inmtn.comWebsite: www.inmtn.comWebsite: www.inmtn.comWebsite: www.inmtn.comWebsite: www.inmtn.comWebsite: www.inmtn.comWebsite: www.inmtn.comWebsite: www.inmtn.comWebsite: www.inmtn.comWebsite: www.inmtn.comWebsite: www.inmtn.comWebsite: www.inmtn.comWebsite: www.inmtn.comWebsite: www.inmtn.comWebsite: www.inmtn.comWebsite: www.inmtn.comWebsite: www.inmtn.comWebsite: www.inmtn.comWebsite: www.inmtn.comWebsite: www.inmtn.comWebsite: www.inmtn.comWebsite: www.inmtn.comWebsite: www.inmtn.comWebsite: www.inmtn.comWebsite: www.inmtn.comWebsite: www.inmtn.comWebsite: www.inmtn.comWebsite: www.inmtn.comWebsite: www.inmtn.comWebsite: www.inmtn.comWebsite: www.inmtn.comWebsite: www.inmtn.comWebsite: www.inmtn.comWebsite: www.inmtn.comWebsite: www.inmtn.comWebsite: www.inmtn.comWebsite: www.inmtn.comWebsite: www.inmtn.comWebsite: www.inmtn.comWebsite: www.inmtn.comWebsite: www.inmtn.comWebsite: www.inmtn.com

Instrumentation Specialists

Water & Weather Monitoring

��Flow & Level��Water Quality��Wetland Monitoring��Weather & Climate��Soil Moisture��SCADA Systems��Irrigation Monitoring

Toll Free (800) 948-6236


The level of concern about current and future water supplies in the Southwest has clearly been exacerbated by the current drought. In recent discussions in various parts of Arizona,

the term “water sustainability” has become a virtual mantra. On the three state university campuses, major research agendas relate to sustainability, and in concept, sustainability sounds like a pretty good idea when contrasted with the alternatives. Yet, in many of these statewide discussions, the word “sustainability” has generated considerable discomfort, and, in one case in particular, the word was actually excised from a major policy document because of concerns that its use was too controversial. How did we get to a place where sustainability has negative connotations?

Why SWhy S**&&t@!n@bility is Not at@!n@bility is Not a&t@!n@bility is Not a&&t@!n@bility is Not a&t@!n@bility is Not aFour-letter WordKatharine Jacobs and Barbara Morehouse, Ph.D. – University of Arizona

New homes line a ridgetop on the slopes of Pusch Ridge in the Santa Catalina Mountains near Tucson. Photo donated and copyrighted by Adriel Heisey. Visit www.adrielheisey.com.

“Sustainability” has multiple definitions and is used in multiple contexts. The word has value-laden and political overtones that cause reactions from many quarters. In fact, an Internet search for the term “anti-sustainability” results in 169 hits, some of which are entire Web sites dedicated to defeating the spread of sustainability concepts. How can this be?

Some of the angst is generated by private property rights advocates who are concerned their rights will be restricted in the name of sustainability. Others are concerned that if a policy in support of sustainability includes the sustainability of natural ecosystems, human needs may have to be balanced with those of other organisms. The concept of sustainability has apparently become associated with environmentalism, which is viewed with suspicion by some. An illustrative quote from the Internet:

“Few seem to understand that environmentalism, hiding behind the mask of noble sounding goals, is in fact socialism with its goal of destroying property rights, the very pillar of capitalism!” (www.americandaily.com/article/1843)

Yet, a broader view may be that preservation of ecosystems and the services they provide is what gives value to private property and our quality of life. Protecting these systems could ultimately be a selfish, not a selfless act. In fact, the most commonly accepted working definition of sustainability, from the Brundtland Commission, is pretty clearly focused on human orientation: “The ability of current generations to meet their needs without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their needs” (World Commission on Environment and Development, 1987).

Water SustainabilityThe politics of water touches virtually everyone, from climate change modelers trying to improve their predictions, to farmers growing crops, and ordinary citizens wondering if water shortages will diminish their property values. Ignoring questions about how much water will be available in the future is becoming increasingly difficult. When and how will sevaere, persistent shortages impact communities and livelihoods? Answering

these questions demands consideration of the public policy of sustainability: for whom, for how long, and at what price?

In Arizona, the management goal for three of Arizona’s five Active Management Areas (Phoenix, Prescott, and Tucson AMAs) is “safe-yield…a water management goal which attempts to achieve and thereafter maintain a long-term balance between the annual amount of groundwater withdrawn in an AMA and the annual amount of natural and artificial recharge in an AMA” (A.R.S. 45-562 A). By contrast “sustainable yield” or “sustainable development,” which many hydrologists view as a more comprehensive concept, includes maintaining surface flows that recharge the groundwater and provide water for environmental uses, including maintenance of aquatic and riparian ecosystems and habitats (Alley and Leake, 2004). This broader definition has undeniable implications for water availability for human beings. However, a landscape devoid of flowing water, riparian trees, and wildlife would result in lower property values, reduced revenues from tourism, and a multitude of other negative impacts to private property.

Water Adequacy The legal concept of adequacy in Arizona is based on availability of sufficient water of adequate quality to support a proposed use for 100 years. Since water of any quality can be treated to meet the water quality needs of any use, sustainability from a water quality perspective is controlled primarily by available financial resources. The 100-year time frame for the quantity calculation is viewed as inadequate by many who are concerned about sustainability in perpetuity. This is a major concern in areas that lack sufficient renewable supplies to support current uses; many areas that have inadequate water supplies continue to grow because no legal mechanisms exist outside of AMAs to ensure even short-term water availability, let alone a 100-year supply.

Scale, Values, and SustainabilitySpatial scale affects the ability to achieve sustainability. For example, Colorado River water that is imported into Arizona is viewed as a “renewable” supply, unlike groundwater, which is sometimes viewed

as non-renewable because of the length of time it takes to recharge. However, diverting water from the Colorado River affects sustainability for downstream users and environments. The Colorado Delta environment has changed substantially over time as larger quantities of water have been dammed and diverted upstream, in turn affecting water flows to Mexico and the marine environment in the Gulf of California. The perspective of Arizona’s water users may not be sufficiently broad to address the consequences of such diversions.

Temporal issues also influence the level and nature of water resource sustainability. In some cases deterioration of sustainable water resource conditions may be discerned quite easily and rapidly, as when a surface reservoir level declines, leaving behind a telltale “bathtub ring.” Other problems may take decades to be recognized, such as impacts on groundwater supplies from changes in climate or water use patterns. We don’t usually know whether the conditions we are observing today are anomalous in the context of a long period of history, or whether we are seeing a steady state that has remained unchanged over the centuries. This argues for making decisions in the context of a longer-term perspective, using whatever data are available to test our understanding.

Changing perceptions and values also affect our ability to achieve sustainability. The case of salt cedar in the riverbeds of the West is a good example. Salt cedar is an exotic species that was once planted along the riverbeds to stabilize the banks during


See Four-letter word, page 26

Adjusting values and expectations is part of the equation; so is enhancing the development and use of science that is relevant, useful, and usable under varying conditions.

Four-letter Word


For several decades, humans have become increasingly aware of the need for “sustainability” of

water resources for human consumption, industry, irrigation, and viable natural ecosystems. Sustainability is an especially relevant topic in the Southwest because of limited water supplies and rapidly expanding populations. However, the term is not clearly understood by all; ecologists, economists, hydrologists, and others have offered various definitions. Alley and others (1999) define sustainability of groundwater as “development and use of groundwater in a manner that can be maintained for an indefinite time without causing unacceptable environmental, economic, or social consequences.” Other definitions introduce the concept of not leaving future generations with fewer resources than the present. Regardless of the definition, sustainability is a concept that pertains to maintaining water resources for an indefinite time in the future. Furthermore, sustainability is not a purely scientific concept, but one that involves societal decisions about which consequences of human water use are acceptable or unacceptable (Alley and Leake, 2004). Many human activities, ranging from

land use to direct diversions of water, affect water-resources systems. The time scales over which activities ultimately cause consequences range from nearly immediate to decades or centuries. Thus, if we wish to try to manage water resources sustainably, we must consider the time scales of these consequences.

Surface WaterSurface-water diversion produces rapid, easily observed responses in water availability to streams, lakes, and wetlands. The graph below (left) illustrates how dam construction on the Colorado River caused immediate and unmistakable changes in downstream flow characteristics. However, time scales come

into play in other ways: climatic variations have both short- and long-term effects on surface-water resources. In a given week or year, an allocation may be affected by drought or flood. Yet a century of streamflow data was required to show that allocations in the lower Colorado River are based on a wetter-than-average period of time, and that the river is overallocated (Weatherford and Brown, 1986).

Human values also reflect a temporal aspect. During the dam-building era of the early- to mid-20th century, high value was placed on providing water for irrigation, public supply, power generation, and downstream flood control. These issues are still important, but recently the preservation and restoration of natural riverine ecosystems affected by dams have gained value.

Land UseHuman activities affect surface-water runoff, groundwater recharge, and climate. The effects can be immediate or range over decades, but many, such as changes in recharge, might never be detected without careful, long-term monitoring. The cause and effect of land use activities is seen in the urbanization of the Las Vegas

Time Scales in the Sustainable Management of Water ResourcesColleen Filippone – National Park Service and Stanley A. Leake – U.S. Geological Survey

The task of water scientists and engineers is to identify consequences of development, including timing and locations of effects. The task of society ... is to determine which effects are tolerable.

Mean monthly discharge in the Colorado River at Lees Ferry, Arizona.

Average monthly and annual peak flow in Las Vegas Wash, 1957-2003, and population of the city of Las Vegas, Nevada.

Valley (see figure at right). The Las Vegas Wash, the major valley drainage, shows a trend in average monthly flow coincident with the trend in population (see graph, previous page, right). Furthermore, the series of annual peak flows shows a trend of increasing flows. These trends can be explained respectively by increased discharge of sewage effluent and higher runoff from an increasingly urbanized watershed during the period of record. Land-use practices also can affect water quality in terms of sediment concentration, salinity, and chemical composition over years to decades.

GroundwaterGroundwater has allowed human development in areas where surface-water supplies are unavailable or of poor quality. As of 2000, groundwater accounted for 35 percent of fresh water use in Arizona, California, Colorado, Nevada, New Mexico, and Utah (Hutson and others, 2004). When groundwater pumping begins, the rate of pumping is balanced by an equal rate of storage decline in the aquifer. If pumping continues long enough, cones of depression in many aquifers

stabilize, as the outflow to streams, springs and wetlands is “captured” by the pumping. If pumping continues indefinitely and sufficient outflow can be captured, a new stable condition will develop in which the rate of storage decline is zero and the rate of groundwater outflow to springs and streams is reduced by the rate of pumping. Consequences related to loss of storage in the aquifer include increased pumping lifts, land subsidence, and degraded water quality. These consequences can occur almost immediately near pumped wells and can spread to large distances in ensuing decades. Consequences related to capture of outflow include reduced availability of water to riparian and aquatic ecosystems and reduced availability of surface water for humans.

Timing of capture of surface water outflow is dependent on aquifer properties and the distance between pumping and outflow areas. A well that pumps 20 miles from a stream in an areally extensive aquifer that has a diffusivity of 1.1×105 ft2/day could pump for more than 300 years before 50 percent of the pumping rate consisted of captured streamflow (see graph at left). A well located 5 miles from the stream would require just 20 years for the same level of capture.

Management StrategiesWater-resources management and policy in states in the Southwest typically consider only short-term consequences of development, and tolerate or ignore long-term consequences. An exception might be Arizona’s Adequate and Assured Water Supply programs, which have 100-year management horizons. The Adequate

Water Supply Program, initiated in 1973, stipulates that real-estate developments must have physical, legal, and continuous availability of water for 100 years. For developments with a central supply of groundwater, the main criterion is that depth to water cannot exceed 1,200 feet below land surface in 100 years. This program is a consumer-protection measure that does not consider consequences other than loss of water supply for homeowners.

Historically, groundwater and surface water in the Southwest have been managed separately, with little recognition that development of one resource could affect the other. But we’ve learned that groundwater withdrawals can affect surface-water resources over time scales from decades to centuries, and recently states have begun to consider management strategies that address this interconnection.

For future management of water resources, several points are noteworthy. First, it is not possible to develop water supplies without consequences to water-resource systems. Even small developments with


Time Scales in the Sustainable Management of Water Resources

Urban land use in Las Vegas Valley (yellow), 1907-1995 (Acevedo and others, 2003).

Relation between time of 50 percent capture of streamflow and the distance from a stream to a pumped well in an aquifer. Time of 50 percent capture is the number of years until 50 percent of the pumping rate is accounted for as reduced groundwater discharge to the stream. The relation is for a fully penetrating stream and pumped well in an aquifer having a diffusivity of 110,000 feet2a diffusivity of 110,000 feet2a diffusivity of 110,000 feet /day.2/day.2

See Time scales, page 26

Groundwater is an essential component of both the hydrologic system and the world’s water

supply. Globally, many factors contribute to our reliance on groundwater resources, such as continued population growth, climate variability, and uncertain surface water availability. These factors also affect groundwater availability. More effective management practices are being sought to ensure the future availability and reliability of groundwater resources.

This article summarizes a white paper the authors prepared on behalf of the Groundwater Resources Association of California (GRA), an outcome of the 2002 GRA Annual Meeting, “Sustaining Groundwater Resources: The Critical Vision.”

Groundwater’s Dynamic EquilibriumGroundwater resources are found in diverse physiographic and geologic settings. Under natural conditions, a balance exists among the interrelated components of the natural resources system that include groundwater, surface water, soils, the atmosphere, and ecosystems. When disrupted by natural or imposed stresses, these components, including biota, adjust to attain a new equilibrium. Thus, where extensive groundwater development occurs, system dynamics invariably change due to such causes as pumping that intercepts regional recharge, deep percolation of irrigation water, and diversions that redistribute or reduce recharge.

When natural discharge mechanisms are disrupted in closed or partly open basins, soil and groundwater salinization tends to occur, particularly beneath irrigated lands. Transferred or imported water and innovative recharge and recycling

approaches constitute an increasingly important part of the basin hydrologic budget. When imported water containing higher levels of dissolved salts than local sources is recharged into the basin, long-term water quality is impacted.

Many land uses contribute to widespread groundwater contamination. Once groundwater is impaired, restoring its quality is a challenge. Additionally, natural constituents that occur in the subsurface may become a concern when mobilized through natural or human activities. Excessive pumping that causes a persistent decline in groundwater levels may have other consequences, including overdraft, seawater intrusion in coastal aquifers, and land subsidence. As groundwater use increases, timely adaptive management approaches will be required to ensure the availability and quality of groundwater and to protect ecosystems.

California’s Groundwater Use and ManagementCalifornia’s groundwater management practices stem from two common law traditions. One granted landowners private ownership of all groundwater beneath their land. The other is the public trust doctrine, which originated in early Roman law and held that certain resources such as air, running water, the sea, and lands adjoining the sea were available to all humankind by “natural law.” The doctrine became part of the constitutions of many U.S. states, including California, and governments became responsible for ensuring that water is beneficially, and not wastefully, used. Legally, it can be argued that public trust applies only to navigable waters and tidelands, and the scope of public trust is restricted to surface water resources. However, from declarations in 1911 and 1921 that later formed California

Water Code (Code) Sections 102 and 104, groundwater falls within the realm of public trust, if not within its legal fold.

In the 1880s, John Wesley Powell, the second director of the U.S. Geological Survey, suggested physiographic basins should be used as water management units, particularly in the arid lands of the American West (deBuys, 2001). At the time, his suggestion went unheeded. Now, however, some groundwater management plans recognize the intrinsic relationship of the components of the natural resources system. As a result of recently enacted legislation, attention is legislatively directed to basin-wide, integrated management and associated monitoring programs. Additionally, the California Department of Water Resources, in coordination with others (2003), developed guidelines on the essential and required components of local groundwater management plans to promote effective groundwater management.

Sustainability PremisesThe GRA white paper defines sustainability as follows:

“Sustainability encompasses the beneficial use of groundwater to support present and future generations, while simultaneously ensuring that unacceptable consequences do not result from such use.”

Sustainability of groundwater resources


Ultimately, sustainability requires congruity between resource management objectives, societal interests and demands, and nature’s laws.

Sustaining Groundwater Resources: California’s Shift Toward More Effective Groundwater ManagementVicki Kretsinger – Luhdorff and Scalmanini Consulting Engineers and T.N. Narasimhan, Ph.D. – University of California, Berkeley


entails four basic premises:

• Surface water and groundwater constitute a single resource.

• Groundwater is a finite resource and a component of a larger natural resources system. Actions on one or more system components generally affect the balance of the whole system.

• Groundwater replenishment is strongly influenced by climate variability, as well as natural and enhanced recharge processes. Consequently, groundwater resources development must adapt to the system’s varying capacity for renewal.

• Communities need to share and manage groundwater resources so the natural resources system retains its integrity for the future.

Significant challenges lie in defining “acceptable” change. Customary practices and institutions pose challenges for a transition from historical, economically based water use to integrated, adaptive water management approaches. Ultimately, sustainability requires congruity between resource management objectives, societal interests and demands, and nature’s laws.

Sustainable Management TenetsEffective groundwater management will require new and comprehensive approaches to define and quantify sustainability, consideration of the long-term region-specific objectives and cost-benefit factors, and dissemination of current information to the public. Key tenets include:

Water Resources Management Units To manage groundwater sustainably, the management area (basin or watershed) must be defined and the water resources management objectives determined.

Coordination Among InstitutionsIn guiding their activities, institutions must remain mindful of their roles within a larger integrated context. Basin-wide or watershed management requires cooperation among local entities.

Data Collection and MonitoringExpanded water resources-related data collection, storage, and dissemination programs are needed to facilitate future groundwater resources evaluations, planning, and management.

Ongoing systematic monitoring must simultaneously be undertaken to allow continual assessment of the effectiveness of actions implemented in meeting basin-wide management objectives.

Supporting ResearchResearch, basin-wide investigations, and public education programs require multidisciplinary collaboration and also federal, state, and local funding. Research efforts are needed to: improve methods and technologies for quantifying individual processes of the hydrologic system; examine and quantify the interrelated processes within the hydrologic continuum; develop climate forecasting methods that consider global influences; and develop methodologies for sustainable development, conservation, recycling, and reuse.

Economic AnalysesFuture economic analyses of water resources must incorporate institutional and management tools to optimize sustainability within the constraints of the physical and chemical attributes of the natural resources system while considering the interests of future generations.

Public Outreach and EducationSustainable water management depends on public understanding and support. It also requires educating and training multidisciplined water resources professionals.

Will these tenets present ongoing challenges? Are they common sense? Time will tell. Achieving sustainability hinges on whether stakeholders embrace the concept as a core element of future water resources management programs.

GRA continues to promote sustainable groundwater management through its symposia, annual meetings, outreach programs, and legislative activities. Visit www.grac.org. Contact Vicki Kretsinger at [email protected].

References.................................California Department of Water Resources, 2003.

California’s Groundwater, Bulletin 118 – Update 2003.

deBuys, W. (ed.), 2001. Seeing Things Whole: The Essential John Wesley Powell, Washington, DC, Island Press/Shearwater Books.

Narasimhan, T.N. and V. Kretsinger, 2003. Developing, Managing and Sustaining California’s Groundwater Resources. A White Paper for the Groundwater Resources Association of California (at www.grac.org).

The Utton Transboundary Resources Center sponsored an extraordinary conference in early September

2004, “Crossing Cultural Boundaries for Sustainable Solutions.” The 80 invitees included Native Americans, Hispanics, Anglos, farmers, municipal water providers, and bureaucrats, most of whom are dealing with water settlements involving diverse cultures and crossing boundaries of sovereign authority. Panels explored cultural perspectives on water, looked at successes in transboundary settlements, and considered how judges think about water settlements. Participants interacted within a hypothetical transboundary scenario in which they took cultural roles not necessarily their own. The objective was to create a problem-solving community among conferees, and to explore how communities create sustainable solutions.

As conferees shared their experiences it became clear that sustainability has a different meaning in market-based and land-based cultures. This difference sheds light on our struggles to define sustainability.

The Imperative of PlaceLand-based communities are those in which people are linked to their place. In such communities, the health, the past, and the future of the people are identified with the health, the past, and the future of the place. A conferee from Zia Pueblo said,

“Pueblo people have been here since 1200 AD, and we’ll be here till the end of time. If we mess up our own environment, we have no one to blame but ourselves. There are temptations, but when you look at the long term you can resist those temptations. Pueblo people say ‘We can outwait anybody.’ It’s not me saying that, it’s the Pueblo. When I am gone, the Pueblo will still be here.”

The certainty that the land-based Puebloan peoples have that they will still be here focuses their traditions and practices on balance and the future, that is, on sustainability.

In contrast, market communities are recent social inventions: markets emerged as an organizing social principle in the 18th century. The Industrial Revolution created the fictitious commodities of land and labor from the basic elements of life—nature and people—in order to depersonalize production and allow labor and resources to be allocated by markets. Production itself was divorced from the social organization provided by family, clan, tradition, and place, and remarried to the market. This new way of thinking spread like wildfire. Today, we have forgotten that this is a fiction; the transactability of land, water, and labor seems “natural.”

Like all market transactions, transactions in nature and labor focus not on balance, but on growth; not on the future, but on the powerful and undiscounted present.

The Indivisibility of Nature A Navajo conferee described himself as “a Navajo who is trained to be a white man.” From this vantage point he observed:

“Navajo teaching is that four elements make up life: water, fire, solid, and air. In this society we try to divide those up, to take ownership of those things that sustain life—this part is yours, that part is mine. The elders are saying that we’re working against the law of nature, the law of life. You can’t own these things.

“In learning to be a white man that’s what I’ve learned. White people want to divide things, to own things, and that’s how your life is measured, as I understand it. We need to work together to arrive at a solution from our different perspectives. The old people say ‘You cannot take water.’ When they say you cannot take water, they’re saying you cannot own it. It is common ownership. But common ownership doesn’t have a place in Anglo-American jurisprudence, because that is all about separation.”

The Land-Based Community Looks at Sustainability

… sustainability has a different meaning in market-based and land-based cultures. This difference sheds light on our struggles to define sustainability.

Chris Garcia, Ph.D. – Garcia & Nunn Unlimited, Villanueva, New Mexico

Cultural Perspectives:


This is a crucial point. The market is also all about separation. People (called “labor”) and nature (called “resources”) are separated from their place to be allocated as commodities by the market. This separation gave rise to a “wealth of nations” under the market’s invisible hand that far exceeded Adam Smith’s dreams; it also deeply changed how people and nature relate to place. People are no longer seen as “belonging” to the community they live in. Resources, water for example, are no longer seen as “belonging” to the watershed. The market-based community is a highly dynamic environment in which both social and natural systems are driven by the engine of growth. No wonder it becomes difficult to define “sustainability” in this context!

Environmentalism or Natural Justice? Market-based communities cast the challenge of “sustainability” as an environmental issue, a problem of the natural world. In contrast, members of land-based communities see the twin separation of people from both nature and community as a single, organic threat to the sustainability of their lives. As one conference participant said:

“Extinction happens to communities as well as to species. We have seen tribes become extinct. Acequia communities have fears about becoming extinct. When you transfer water rights out of an acequia, you take a step toward the extinction of that community. We care, not only for the viability of natural systems, but about the imperative of justice for social groups. We should be talking, not about the environmental imperative, but about the imperative of natural justice.”

Another added:

“Environmental approaches to water have left out critical issues about communities. It goes back to seeing water as a commodity. If we’re going to evolve, we have to start thinking about cultural, spiritual issues.”

It Takes Two to See OneThe role of the counselor in helping individuals understand their behavior

has been described as “It takes two to see one,” in the same way that depth-perception depends on having two eyes. Our own ability to understand our social and economic behavior appears to suffer from an impairment similar to that of the one-eyed man. We do not see that the market is a recent invention with an as-yet undetermined impact on the world, and our impaired vision makes it difficult for us to conceptualize sustainability. The market-based world has much to learn from land-based communities. Our land-based neighbors see aspects of our separated society that we cannot. They can tell us about it. We merely need to listen better than we have to date.

Humans are institution-inventing creatures. It is our institutions that make us such effective animals—sometimes too effective. The great sustainability question, to my mind, is “Can we see the dynamics of our institutions and change the elements of those dynamics that are bringing us to catastrophic collapse?” To answer affirmatively, we will need the rare perspective on our market institutions offered by land-based communities, to whom those institutions are foreign. If our Navajo colleague can learn to think like a white man, perhaps he can also help us see our world through the eyes of a Navajo.

Contact Chris Garcia at [email protected].

Sustainability E-Journal Coming SoonSustainability: Science, Practice, & Policyis a new peer-reviewed, open access e-journal designed to provide a platform for the dissemination of new practices and for dialogue emerging from the field of sustainability. Published online as part of a government/private industry partnership between Cambridge Scientific Abstracts and the U.S. Geological Survey’s National Biological Information Infrastructure, it will be available free to all to read, download, copy, and reproduce for any scientific purposes. The first edition is scheduled for Spring 2005 release.

The mission of the e-journal is to rapidly disseminate information on sustainability science issues in support of a greater global exchange of knowledge. It aims to establish a much-needed forum for cross-disciplinary discussion of empirical and social sciences, practices, and policies related to sustainability, and to facilitate communication among scientists, practitioners, and policy makers who are investigating and shaping nature-society interactions and working toward sustainable solutions.

The e-journal will include guest editorials, articles, reviews, and a community issues forum.

Visit ejournal.nbii.gov/


NGWA Initiatives on Groundwater Sustainability

In the next 20 years, entire states or localities across the nation will likely experience groundwater shortages, if they

have not already. What’s more, fundamental data necessary for policymakers to make informed decisions regarding the use and management of groundwater are currently lacking in many areas, thus impeding efforts to head off shortages.

For several years now, members of the National Ground Water Association (NGWA) have identified groundwater sustainability as the most pressing groundwater-related issue. But concern about water sustainability is not restricted to groundwater professionals. The 108th Congress passed several bills aimed at addressing water sustainability issues. Prior to adjourning in October, Congress passed the Homeland Security 2005 Appropriations Bill which included billions of dollars for drought relief. The California Bay-Delta Restoration program (CALFED), which includes funds for feasibility studies for four water storage projects, also was passed in October. Congress was unable to reach final passage of the Water Resources Development Act, but the measure will be resurrected in the 109th Congress.

Policy leaders in Washington, D.C. are acutely aware of the need for water management policies, from addressing water contamination by chemicals such as MTBE and perchlorate to infrastructure needs and water rights issues. NGWA is working to educate government officials with respect to these issues.

NGWA’s Regional Ground Water Management Task Force is gathering benchmark data and viewpoints from groundwater professionals to determine what federal actions would be most helpful in the area of groundwater management.

As part of these efforts, the task force has issued a white paper, a call to action, and a bibliography on groundwater sustainability. Collectively, these documents are aimed at nonprofessionals who are interested in learning more about groundwater sustainability issues. The complete documents are available at the NGWA web site, www.ngwa.org/ngwainwashington/environmental.shtml.

In the white paper, the Task Force identified the following key contributors to groundwater shortages:

Population Growth and Distribution PatternsHigh population growth rates in arid and semi-arid areas and the urbanization of America have a direct impact on the balance of supply and demand of our nation’s groundwater resources. The largest census-to-census growth took place

from 1990 to 2000, with an increase of 32.7 million people. Arid western states experienced the fastest growth rate in the nation, at 19.7 percent, during that period.

Contamination or the Presumption of ContaminationCalifornia provides an example of how contamination or the presumption of contamination can contribute to groundwater shortages. The California Department of Health Services reported that perchlorate has been detected in more than 300 public supply sources and an equally large number of private homeowner wells. Also, in portions of the Southwest, Northeast, and Midwest, arsenic occurs naturally in groundwater at levels that exceed the recently lowered drinking water standard of 10 parts per billion. According to the Arizona Department of Environmental Quality, approximately one-third of Arizona water systems exceed the arsenic standard.

Here Today, Gone Tomorrow?

Chris Reimer – Director of Government Affairs, National Ground Water Association


SURVEY RESULTS

Increasing Efforts to Protect and Enhance In-Stream Flow and Aquatic EcosystemsConcerns that groundwater withdrawals can negatively affect aquatic ecosystems by reducing in-stream flows could lead to limits on groundwater extractions. Conversely, surface water withdrawals or the lining of irrigation channels may adversely impact groundwater replenishment. Because it is impossible to use a natural resource without having some effect on it, zero impact is neither a possible nor desirable goal. However, by understanding the linkages between groundwater and other water-dependent natural resources, we can make informed decisions and sustainable compromises.

Recharge VariabilityGroundwater resources and recharge rates vary locally and regionally. In areas such as the Southwest, groundwater currently being withdrawn entered the aquifer as recharge thousands of years ago during a wetter climate.

Current Water Infrastructure System DesignToday’s drinking water infrastructure often involves centralized, large-scale groundwater withdrawals. In regional systems, the extracted groundwater may be piped miles away from the original withdrawal point. Even in some rural areas and small communities, we are moving away from individual or small drinking water and wastewater systems that largely maintain the water within the local groundwater system. NGWA contends that water infrastructure system design must consider impacts on the natural water system.

Surveys on SustainabilityAs part of NGWA’s efforts to promote groundwater sustainability, the organization has been surveying NGWA members and state geologists. The national surveys are being followed by more specific state surveys.

The tables at left summarize some results of the national, Arizona, and New Mexico surveys conducted to date. National survey

respondents believe the three most useful actions the federal government can take to help meet states’ information collection gaps and advance state water management goals are to increase federal funding for cooperative groundwater quantity data collection, groundwater quality data collection, and mapping of aquifers.

The groundwater professionals also overwhelmingly agreed that: states should get involved in groundwater sustainability issues (90 percent); consideration of resource renewability is a key to groundwater sustainability (87 percent); and man-made water infrastructure systems should be developed and designed with greater consideration for their impacts on the natural water systems (84 percent).

Survey respondents are split as to whether they believe it should be permissible to treat groundwater as a commodity to buy, sell, and transport outside the basin.

The issue of water availability will be examined further at the Ground Water Summit, hosted by the Association of Ground Water Scientists and Engineers (AGWSE), a division of NGWA, April 17-20, 2005 in San Antonio, Texas. Visit www.ngwa.org.

See Santa Cruz, page 31


Water in the West can be a contentious issue, and that’s certainly the case in Texas.

The population of the state is expected to increase from 21 million in 2000 to 40 million in 2050; demand on water resources likewise will nearly double. In no place has water been a greater issue than in south-central Texas, where since 1996, the Edwards Aquifer Authority (Authority) has worked to adjudicate withdrawal permits for the Edwards Aquifer.

Edwards Aquifer HydrologyThe Balcones Fault Zone portion of the Edwards Aquifer is one of the most permeable and productive aquifers in the United States. It is the primary source of water for approximately 1.7 million people, including the city of San Antonio, and provides most of the water for agriculture and industry across its 180-mile wide extent.

The karstic Edwards Aquifer is noted for its sinkholes, sinking streams, caves, springs, and high-yielding water wells. The interconnected fractures and caves in the aquifer have created areas of incredibly high permeability and are home to more than 40 endemic species, including various catfish, shrimp, and salamanders. This high permeability also causes the aquifer system to respond rapidly to recharge and discharge events. Water levels can fall more than two feet per day in response to heavy agricultural and municipal pumping in the region. Alternately, heavy rainfall can cause the water level in some wells to rise more than 150 feet in less than a week.

Artesian wells in some parts of the aquifer have historically yielded more than 30,000 gallons per minute.

Withdrawal of water from wells in the Edwards Aquifer impacts the volume of water discharging at Comal and San Marcos springs, the two largest springs in the southwestern United States. These springs form the habitat for seven endangered species and are important sources of water for downstream users on the Guadalupe River. In addition, a highly developed water recreation industry uses both springs. Discharge from the springs is variable, however. During the 1956 drought of record, Comal Springs went dry and San Marcos Springs had greatly reduced flow. At that time, the annual water withdrawal from the Edwards Aquifer was about 320,000 acre-feet; today, the 10-year median volume is 409,000 acre-feet per year.

The Edwards Aquifer AuthorityIn 1991, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) was sued under the Endangered Species Act by the Sierra Club, which alleged that the agency inadequately protected the endangered and protected species in the Comal and San Marcos springs ecosystems. The Sierra Club won the lawsuit and a federal judge gave

the state of Texas a deadline to regulate water withdrawals from the Edwards Aquifer. In 1993, the Texas Legislature passed the Edwards Aquifer Authority Act (the Act), creating an entity to regulate aquifer withdrawals. Its formation was immediately challenged in court, and not until 1996 were all the issues settled.

The Authority’s ChallengeUnder the Act, the Authority is charged with limiting the amount of water that can be withdrawn to 450,000 acre-feet per year until 2008, when the aquifer “cap” drops to 400,000 acre-feet per year. However, the Act also requires the Authority to issue permits to users who can prove beneficial use of groundwater between 1972 and 1993 (the “historical period”). In addition, the statute allocates two acre-feet of water per acre of land irrigated during the historical period. Municipal and industrial users were issued an amount equal to the average amount used during this period. To date, permits have been issued or will be issued for more than 560,000 acre-feet of historical rights – considerably more than the 450,000 acre-feet goal.

The Authority’s Board of Directors must determine how best to reduce the amount of permitted water in order to reach the target withdrawal volume. The board has three options: invoke a junior/senior program that splits each permit and limits the withdrawals by junior users during low aquifer conditions; purchase water permits and retire those withdrawal rights; or invoke a proportional adjustment wherein all users

The Edwards Aquifer Authority

Geary M. Schindel, P.G., and Rick Illgner– Edwards Aquifer Authority

The Authority is charged with limiting the amount of water that can be withdrawn to 450,000 acre-feet ... [but] to date, permits have been issued ... for more than 560,000 acre-feet.

Working Towards Sustainable Water Management


Flowing artesian well in the Edwards Aquifer used for monitoring by the Authority.Flowing artesian well in the Edwards Aquifer used for monitoring by the Authority.

share the reductions in proportion to the size of their right regardless of aquifer levels. The estimated cost to purchase and retire the excess 110,000 acre-feet per year is approximately $200 million. For now, the board has chosen a temporary junior/senior permit program based on a proportional reduction of all permit holders until 2007. In addition, the Authority has promulgated regulations to implement a demand management/critical period management program in the event that aquifer levels decline below specified levels in aquifer index wells. If a drought of record were to recur, permitted water withdrawals across the aquifer could be limited to 350,000 acre-feet of water annualized. Over the last five years, the region annually has used from 353,200

to 442,700 acre-feet of water, with a median of

Regional Water PlanningOne of the primary reasons the Authority was established was to protect endangered species in the Comal and San Marcos springs ecosystems. The Authority initiated development of a Habitat Conservation Plan (HCP) in 1999; a second draft was completed in July 2004 and released for public comment prior to submission to the FWS. The draft HCP contains several elements, including aquifer withdrawal limits under normal and drought conditions, monitoring and mitigation measures, and funding estimates. However, it does not guarantee springflow under all conditions.

Determining the current usage of the aquifer and the exact reductions of withdrawals that would be required to

the most severe drought in the past 300 years, and illustrate that springflow is not predictable. Therefore, under the most severe drought conditions, the draft HCP calls for the establishment of refugia, habitats protected from environmental changes experienced by the region.

In summary, the Authority is moving forward with a new plan for groundwater management: issuing permits, limiting and monitoring groundwater withdrawals, and managing the cornerstone of water supplies for south-central Texas. However, many difficult issues remain to be addressed in the quest for water sustainability for Texas’ citizens and the environment.

Contact Geary Schindel at [email protected].

During the non-irrigation season, river flow in the El Paso area consists mostly of treated wastewater discharges (effluent) from the Sunland Park Wastewater Treatment Plant in Sunland Park, New Mexico and the Northwest Wastewater Treatment Plant in El Paso.

water, with a median of 407,200 acre-feet.

guarantee springflow under various climatic conditions would be extremely difficult. Furthermore, tree-ring studies indicate that the 1949-1956 drought that temporarily dried up Comal Springs was

Geologic cross-section of the Edwards Aquifer (from the Edwards Aquifer Authority, 2002).


Jon Cradit in Ezell’s Cave in San Marcos, Texas. The cave provides access to one of the places you can actually view the Edwards Aquifer.


Time scales, continued from page 17floods. But when competition for water supplies increased, salt cedars came to be viewed as a nuisance: a non-native invasive species that uses a lot of water. Efforts to eradicate salt cedar subsequently emerged throughout the West. Most recently, it was discovered that the endangered southwestern willow flycatcher nests in salt cedars, again increasing the perceived value of the plants. These large swings in public values and perception can cause diametrically opposing policy positions, and present major challenges for achieving sustainability. Clearly, major equity considerations are related to who pays for sustainability efforts and who benefits.

Toward Sustainable Water Resource ManagementTo achieve meaningful sustainability of water resources, the scale of governance must correspond to the scale of the problems society wishes to address. In some cases, the scale may be local, for example, preservation of a small but valuable spring fed by a nearby water source; in other cases, management may need to be at the scale of an entire watershed. With the possibility looming that a shortage may be declared on the Colorado River in the next few years, all of the states in the Upper and Lower Basins, as well as Mexico, have a high stake in the outcome. A hopeful sign is the seriousness of seven-state efforts to identify voluntary shortage-sharing options to avoid a “call” on the Upper Basin, requiring those states to curtail use in order to meet Lower Basin obligations, an action that inevitably would bring lawsuits. Looking for collaborative solutions prior to the onset of crisis promotes sustainability.

Building ResilienceAchieving sustainability requires building greater capacity to recover from inevitable human and environmental stresses. Adjusting values and expectations is part of the equation; so is enhancing the development and use of science that is relevant, useful, and usable under varying conditions. The information must be available when it is needed, and must focus on the temporal and spatial scales at which the problem can be optimally addressed.

The scientific information also must be made accessible and comprehensible to the intended users. In some cases, this will likely require participation of science-savvy integrators who can bridge the knowledge gap between academic scientists and end users.

Also needed is construction of institutional structures and processes that allow — indeed, encourage — adaptive management. In the end, no information, no matter how good the science behind it, is useful if a decision maker cannot be innovative in using that information. Adaptive management allows the flexibility to change decision processes and behaviors (temporarily or permanently) in a manner that reduces or averts negative impacts or, in the best case, increases positive impacts. At the same time, questions arise concerning how much adaptation can reasonably occur and over what time period. Processes that only unfold over long time spans, such as long-term climate patterns, make real-time decision making much more complex.

The Key to Water SustainabilityAlthough adaptive management is clearly a step forward because of the ability to respond to new scientific understandings as they evolve, it presents some dangers as well. To the extent that we do not understand the long-term processes we are observing, reacting to evolving conditions can result in more negative outcomes than the old-fashioned, interminable deliberation process. We need to learn how to integrate our constantly improving understanding of natural systems with our decision-making processes, improve our monitoring systems and analyze the implications of what we observe over multiple time and space scales, learn from our mistakes, and avoid making consequential decisions that are irreversible.

It’s worth a try.

Contact Katharine Jacobs at [email protected] and Barbara Morehouse at [email protected].

References.................................Alley, W.M., and S.A. Leake, 2004. The journey from safe

yield to sustainability. Ground Water, 42(1): 12-16.

World Commission on Environment and Development, 1987. From One Earth to One World: An Overview. G. Bruntland, ed. Oxford, Oxford University Press.

immeasurable effects can combine to result in significant consequences. The task of water scientists and engineers is to identify consequences of development, including timing and locations of effects. The task of society, on the other hand, is to determine which effects are tolerable. Second, long-term monitoring of key system components such as water levels and flow is important in understanding natural and human-induced variations. Such information can be used in adaptive management schemes in which action can be taken if conditions cross a prescribed threshold. This strategy works best for surface-water systems, in which response to change is rapid.

Groundwater systems, on the other hand, respond slowly and negative effects can persist long after withdrawals cease. Sound long-term management of water resources will require development and institutionalized use of decision tools that incorporate hydrologic data and analyses, climate variability, population and land-use trends, and societal values.

References..............................Acevedo, W., L. Gaydos, J. Tilley, C.

Mladinich, J. Buchanan, S. Blauer, K. Kruger, and J. Schubert, 2003. Urban land use change in the Las Vegas Valley. U.S. Geological Survey: geochange.er.usgs.gov/sw/changes/anthropogenic/population/las_vegas/

Alley, W.M., and S.A. Leake, 2004. The journey from safe yield to sustainability, Ground Water, 42(1): 12-16.

Alley, W.M., T.E. Reilly, and O.L. Franke, 1999. Sustainability of ground-water resources, U.S. Geological Survey Circular 1186.

Hutson, S.S., N.L. Barber, J.F. Kenny, K.S. Linsey, D.S. Lumia, and M.A. Maupin, 2004. Estimated use of water in the United States in 2000, U.S. Geological Survey Circular 1268.

Weatherford, G.D., and F.L. Brown, eds., 1986. New Courses for the Colorado River, Albuquerque, University of New Mexico Press.

Four-letter word, continued from page 15


Rabbon to Lead National Flood Management GroupThe California Department of Water Resources announced that Peter D. Rabbon, general manager of California’s Reclamation Board, is the new president of the National Association of Flood and Storm water Management Agencies (NAFSMA). He was elected in September at the association’s annual meeting.

NAFSMA is a national nonprofit organization based in Washington, D.C., that represents local and state flood and storm water management agencies on federal water resource issues. Established in 1978, NAFSMA works closely with the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Environmental Protection Agency, Federal Emergency Management Agency, and Department of Homeland Security, and represents association members on policy matters with Congress and other national water organizations.

Rabbon is a civil engineer registered in California, Nevada, and Oregon. A veteran water resources engineer, he has worked in the private sector, in county government, and for almost 25 years for the state of California, including 10 years in the Department of Water Resources’ Division of Flood Management. He has been the Reclamation Board’s general manager since September 1997.

Visit www.nafsma.org and www.water.ca.gov.

California Water Pioneer Charles Stuart Dies California water industry pioneer Charles L. Stuart died in September at age 90, following a year-long battle with cancer.

A native of Bath, Maine, Stuart began his career in New York, where he managed six Long Island Water Systems of the New York Water Service Company. He arrived in Los Angeles in 1951 and climbed the

executive ladder at Southern California Water Company, from which he retired in 1984 as executive vice president in charge of mergers and acquisitions. During his tenure, Stuart played a major role in the merger or acquisition of 42 firms at the Los Angeles company. He later served on the board and as board president of the West Basin Municipal Water District.

During his long career, Stuart was a pioneer in the development and delivery of water in Southern California. During his presidency of the West Basin Municipal Water District, he was a key player in several major projects, including the construction of the largest reclamation plant in the nation, and in the area of reverse osmosis.

Stuart was a life member and served as chairman of the California-Nevada section of the American Water Works Association (AWWA). He received several national and regional awards from AWWA.

PEOPLE


THE SOCIETY PAGENWRA Holds Numerous Fall SymposiaThe Nevada Water Resources Association (NWRA) offered something for everyone last fall, hosting or co-hosting symposia each month. In September, more than 100 people from across the Southwest met in Fallon, Nevada to learn about arsenic in drinking water. Presenters discussed compliance with new standards and available and upcoming technologies for removing arsenic from drinking water, in anticipation of the January 2006 deadline for meeting stricter federal standards.

A one-day meeting in Las Vegas in October brought individuals together to discuss the sustainability of southern Nevada’s water resources, including discussion of the relationship of the community and its water resources. Speakers represented a diverse group of water professionals, as well as planners, homebuilders, and lawyers.

In November, a one-day class on water rights in Nevada was offered in Pahrump and a one-day symposium on evapotranspiration was held at the Las Vegas Valley Water District, featuring speakers from the Desert Research Institute, the U.S. Geological Survey, and the University of Nevada.

In December, NWRA co-hosted, along with the Multi-State Salinity Coalition and other groups, the third annual two-day summit on salinity management and desalination. This year’s meeting, in Las Vegas, focused on the management of brine concentrate byproduct.

It’s not too late to register for the 2005 Annual Conference, Feb. 1-3 in Reno. This year’s theme is “Growth, Water, and the Quality of Life in Nevada.”

Visit www.nvwra.org for details.

AWWA Publishes Stories From the RoadWater treatment plant operators are an innovative and resourceful group of professionals. Stories from the Road: On

the Job Experiences of Water Treatment Operators, recently published by the American Water Works Association, provides insight to the services these water operators provide.

The book contains accounts of operators in the diverse cities of Cleveland, Ohio; Long Beach, California; Golden, Colorado; and Santa Fe, New Mexico, providing stellar examples of the tough decisions they must make under pressure.

Appendices on pumping and horsepower calculations, chloramination guidelines, disinfection practices for trihalomethane control, and several other topics relevant to the profession are also included.

The 111-page book costs $45 for members, $65 for nonmembers. Order it from www.awwa.org/bookstore/product.cfm?id=20547.

GRAC Hosts Meetings on Arsenic, Dry Cleaner ReleasesThe Groundwater Resources Association of California held two more seminars in their “Series on Groundwater Contaminants” last fall. In October, a two-day meeting, “Arsenic in Groundwater: Impacts on a Critical Resource” was held in Fresno. General session topics included an overview of the regulatory framework, occurrence, and chemistry of arsenic; impacts of arsenic on beneficial use and public health; and remediation techniques. The meeting concluded with a panel discussion on the cost and complications of arsenic cleanup and featured participants from Nevada, Arizona, California, and Mexico.

In November, a one-day symposium in Newport Beach focused on releases at dry cleaner operations and their impacts to groundwater and indoor air. This meeting was a follow-up to a conference held seven months earlier, and built upon material covered then. New areas of emphasis included vapor migration, additional remediation techniques, case studies from Southern California, and securing funding for cleanup.

Visit www.grac.org.

Arid Watercourses Meeting Held in ArizonaThe Association of State Floodplain Managers, together with the Arizona Floodplain Management Association and other groups, hosted the Arid Regions 10th Biennial Conference Nov. 16-19 in Mesa, Arizona. The meeting theme was restoration and management of arid watercourses. The program included two plenary sessions and four tracks of concurrent sessions featuring river restoration, watershed management, modeling and analysis, and projects. The plenary session also included a panel discussion with state representatives from Arizona, California, Colorado, Idaho, and New Mexico on current floodplain management issues, including levees, dam safety, map modernization, mapping of riverine erosion hazard areas, wildfires, and state funding. Pre- and post-conference field trips toured the White Tanks alluvial fan, Tempe Town Lake, and the Rio Salado, Tres Rios, and Agua Fria river restoration projects.

Visit www.azfma.org and www.floods.org.


WHO Guidelines Revised To Reduce Water-Borne Diseasefrom the World Health Organization

Ensuring safe drinking water is a challenge in every part of the world, whether the water comes from rural wells, is piped into people’s homes, or trucked to refugee camps in an emergency. Contamination of drinking water too often is detected only after a health crisis, when people have fallen ill or died as a result of drinking unsafe water. In September, to address the growing challenge of providing safe drinking water, the World Health Organization (WHO) released updated Guidelines for Drinking-water Quality(GDWQ) to help regulators and water service providers worldwide maintain and improve the quality of their drinking water and pre-empt contamination.

Traditionally, drinking water regulations have emphasized the testing of water samples for levels of chemical and biological contaminants, which generally means that problems are detected long after water is consumed. The updated guidelines represent a paradigm shift in advice on how to manage the provision of drinking water, both in the developed and developing worlds, in large urban settings and in rural areas or villages. Henceforth, according to the revised GDWQ, the recommended approach for regulators and operators is to manage drinking water quality in a holistic, systematic fashion from source to tap. This includes ensuring water reservoirs or local wells are not at risk of contamination from human and animal waste, and checking basics like regularly changing water filters.

The new edition has reviewed and revised the recommended values for chemical limits in drinking water in line with the latest scientific evidence. The GDWQ reconfirms guideline values for over 100 chemicals. Because routine monitoring for all of the chemicals is not possible, the guidelines set out practical approaches to rule out some chemicals and to prioritize others.

“This third edition of the WHO Guidelines for Drinking-water Quality is the most for Drinking-water Quality is the most for Drinking-water Qualitysignificant water-related public health

development since the introduction of chlorine. The Guidelines’ requirement for drinking water safety plans should be incorporated in regulations across the world,” said Michael Rouse, president of the International Water Association.

Outbreaks Can Happen AnywhereOutbreaks due to microbes in drinking water can affect hundreds of thousands of people, without regard to wealth or political boundaries. In recent years, communities large and small in some of the world’s most developed countries have been affected by contaminated drinking water, such as E. coli and E. coli and E. coli Campylobacter outbreaks in Campylobacter outbreaks in CampylobacterCanada and Cryptosporidium outbreaks in the United States. Conversely, the hepatitis E outbreak currently sweeping through displaced-persons camps in Darfur, Sudan, and refugee camps in neighboring Chad underscores how waterborne disease can disproportionately affect poor and disadvantaged populations.

A variety of drinking water quality issues throughout the world may be better addressed by the more holistic and preventative approach of the new guidelines. Only 24 percent of the urban population of Latin America and the Caribbean has any water quality control surveillance system, and more than one-

third of the deaths of children less than five years old are due to communicable diseases. Some 35 million people in Bangladesh consume water that contains elevated levels of naturally occurring arsenic; India, China, Myanmar, Vietnam, Laos, and Cambodia face similar problems. Pacific Island countries face severe logistical challenges in organizing safe drinking-water supplies: vulnerable fresh water lenses on islands demand holistic management and public participation if water resources are to be sustained. Disease outbreaks related to water continue to occur in the most economically developed western European countries, where the main cause of outbreaks often is contamination of the raw water supply combined with missing or faulty disinfection procedures. For many of these populations, a standard “sampling and analysis” approach to monitoring does not ensure quality; preventive monitoring is more likely to work.

The WHO guidelines are available at www.who.int/water_sanitation_health/dwq/gdwq3/en/.

AROUND THE GLOBE

Near Alem Kitmama, Ethiopia. Photo from World Health Organization


COMPANY LINEGolder Opens Albuquerque OfficeGolder Associates Inc. recently opened an office in Albuquerque, New Mexico, to provide ground engineering and environmental services in the Southwest. The office will focus initially on assisting Golder’s mining clients with environmental permitting services, closure planning, and related issues. Staff also will provide water resources and water supply development services to various municipal and private clients.

The new office manager is Robert W. Newcomer Jr., who has spent more than 20 years in the private sector as a geologist, hydrogeologist, and geochemist. Additional staff include Lewis P. Munk, a soil scientist with more than 20 years of experience in soils, vegetation ecology, surficial geology, and hazardous waste site investigations; Todd L. Stein, a geologist with more than 15 years of experience in hydrogeology, groundwater hydrology, vadose zone hydrology, water resources, site characterization, remedial investigations, and litigation support; and Douglas E. Romig, a soil scientist with 15 years of experience in soils, vegetation, ecology and water quality.

Visit www.golder.com or phone the Albuquerque office at 505-821-3043.

DBS&A Transfers Stock Ownership to ManagementIn September, the founder of Daniel B. Stephens & Associates, Inc. (DBS&A), a 20-year-old Albuquerque-based water resource and environmental consulting firm, initiated an internal management buyout as part of a longer-term transition to employee ownership.

James A. Kelsey and Stephen J. Cullen received the title of Senior Vice President. Kelsey has been with DBS&A for 12 years and heads the firm’s Strategic Services Division, while Cullen very recently joined the company as Director of California Operations. Michael J. Bitner remains as the firm’s president and CEO and Daniel B. Stephens continues in his role as Chairman of the Board.

The naming of the new employee owners initiates a leadership transition process that will be followed by establishment of an employee stock ownership plan. Ultimately, every full-time employee will own shares in the company.

Visit www.dbstephens.com.

Transwest Geochem Opens Tucson LabTranswest Geochem, based in Phoenix, Arizona, recently opened a Tucson laboratory managed by Dan Hirshfeld. The company offers mobile and fixed-base environmental laboratory and sampling services throughout the Southwest. The Tucson office now offers testing services for ADHS Method 8015AZ.R1, EPA 624, and EPA 8260B, as well as bottle kit pickup and sample drop-off for delivery to the Phoenix laboratory. Additional testing capabilities are in the works.

Visit www.transgeo.com or phone the Tucson lab at 520-573-1061.

Bentley Announces $5 Million in Software GrantsBentley Systems Inc. announced that it will grant Haestad Methods software valued at $5 million to colleges and universities with degree programs in civil and environmental engineering.

The Haestad Methods water resources product line provides for design, analysis, and management of water distribution supply, municipal sanitary sewers, urban stormwater collection, roadway and civil site drainage, and flood control. Thousands of schools worldwide use Haestad Methods software in their engineering

courses, as well as the Haestad Methods textbook, Computer Applications in Hydraulic Engineering.

According to the company, Haestad Methods software can supplement water resources courses in a number of ways: instructors can create examples of water, sanitary sewer, and stormwater networks as part of their courses; students can design and analyze water resources systems; and instructors and students can present their research at workshops and conferences.

Grants for Haestad Methods products will be awarded on a competitive basis.

University representatives may request an application from [email protected] or by visiting www.haestad.com/grants.

Waterloo Hydrogeologic Introduces FEFLOW 5.1Many groundwater flow and transport models, including the U.S. Geological Survey’s MODFLOW and MODPATH and the popular contaminant transport program MT3D, have become worldwide standards. However, according to Waterloo Hydrogeologic, when faced with projects involving complex topography, complicated geology, fractures, unsaturated flow, density-dependent flow, or thermal convection, the value of these models can be limited. To address these challenges, Waterloo Hydrogeologic has released FEFLOW 5.1, an advanced 3-D finite element modeling program suited to handle complex modeling environments. Clients in Australia are currently applying FEFLOW to study seawater intrusion, determine the effects of mine dewatering, delineate wellhead protection areas, estimate contaminant migration pathways, and design groundwater remediation systems. Integral components include interactive graphics, a GIS interface, data regionalization and visualization tools, and powerful numeric techniques.

Visit www.waterloohydrogeologic.com/software/feflow.

Golder’s Albuquerque staff. From left: Stein, Munk, Romig, and Newcomer.


Superfund Project Manager ADEQ - Tucson

Business Directory

Employment Opportunities

In the beautiful Eastern Sierra, home to Mt. Whitney and Death Valley (Inyo County), CA. Salary: $6800-$7200/mo. (without legal educational/experience In the beautiful Eastern Sierra, home to Mt. Whitney and Death Valley (Inyo County), CA. Salary: $6800-$7200/mo. (without legal educational/experience In the beautiful Eastern Sierra, home to Mt. Whitney and Death Valley (Inyo

requirements shown below); $7200-$7853/mo. (w/legal educational/experience County), CA. Salary: $6800-$7200/mo. (without legal educational/experience requirements shown below); $7200-$7853/mo. (w/legal educational/experience County), CA. Salary: $6800-$7200/mo. (without legal educational/experience

requirements shown below). Generous benefit package including employer-paid CalPERS retirement and Social Security. Employer-paid. medical, dental, vision, life insurance and more!

Requires: 1) Master’s degree w/major coursework in public administration, water resources planning, or closely related field, with minimum of five years of increasingly responsible experience in water resources mgmt., including three years of administrative and supervisory experience; OR 2) A law degree with a current license, in good standing, to practice law (if not licensed to practice law in the State of CA, successful candidate must obtain license to practice law in CA with 12 months of appointment as condition of continued employment), plus a minimum of five years of legal practice with at least three years of such practice involving the representation of public entities in water resources, environmental, or a related field, or comparable legal experience in the private sector, including three years of administrative and supervisory experience. Live & work in an area that offers excellent quality of life & endless recreational opportunities including fishing, skiing, hiking, climbing, camping & more!

For job desc. & application form, visit www.inyocounty.us or call us at(760) 878-0407. Open until filled.

Water Department Director

ADEQ seeks applicants to manage remediation of hazardous waste sites. Preferred candidates have experience managing multiple source investigations and associated remediation.

BA in hydrology, environmental engineering, geology or related field and four years related experience, strong written and verbal communications skills required. Background in state and/or federal environmental programs a plus.

Contact Mike Fulton (520) 628-6740 or [email protected]. Az State Gov. - AA/EOE

Employment Opportunities


Sandia Method Conserves Huge Quantities of Ag Waterfrom Sandia National Laboratories

A method that uses roughly one-hundredth the fresh water customarily needed to grow forage for livestock could free up massive amounts of water for human consumption and for residential and industrial uses.

The success of the method is being monitored by 42 wireless sensors being installed in a forage-growing hydroponic greenhouse built within a stone’s throw of the Mexico border, under the supervision of Sandia National Laboratories, a U.S. national security lab.

Sandia is interested, says lab researcher Ron Pate, because “disputes over water are possible, if not likely, causes for war in the 21st century.”

The potential savings in water is particularly important in New Mexico and the American Southwest, Mexico, water-parched regions like the Middle East, certain lands between India and Pakistan, and even northern China, where underground water supplies used intensively for agriculture are dropping lower, says Pate. “In all these places, the majority of water use is for irrigated agriculture rather than direct human consumption and other productive uses.”

Preliminary indications are that hydroponic greenhouses could reduce the amount of land required to produce New Mexico’s alfalfa from 260,000 acres to less than 1,000 acres, and reduce the 800,000 acre-feet of water currently needed to produce livestock forage to 11,000 acre-feet. Eighty percent of New Mexico’s water use is agricultural, with over half used to grow forage, mostly alfalfa.

Conventional farming methods in arid regions lose huge amounts of water through evaporation and over-absorption by soil. Over time, this can also result in soil salination and loss of agricultural productivity. Neither are factors in hydroponic greenhouses, which do not require high-quality arable land to function.

Hydroponic greenhouses recently built in Chihuahua, Mexico, have been used by ranchers during the current drought to grow feed for their herds. However, technical questions about the amount of water saved, the nutritional value of the forage, and optimum light for best growth, have yet to be determined.

Thus, Mexican researchers take a keen interest in the U.S. project taking place just north of the border in Santa Teresa, New Mexico, near El Paso. Researcher Hector Gallegos and hydroponic forage system fabricator Francisco Aguirre are helping in the design, construction, and implementation of the project.

“The difference [between our projects and this one] is the sensors Sandia is installing to check things there,” Gallegos said. “Normally we only use a humidity sensor to know when to run our irrigation.”

The Sandia-placed sensors and computer simulations will tell researchers how to grow crops still more efficiently, Gallegos said. His tests used only readily available wheat and corn; the Sandia tests also include triticale, sorghum, barley, and oats.

The nutritional quality of the hydroponically grown plants will be determined by Clint Loest, a professor

of animal nutrition at New Mexico State University.

“If we can get the animals to perform just as well on greenhouse forage, that would be an incredible advance. ... We might even give up a little performance if it’s going to save so much water,” he said.

The difference between traditional agriculture and hydroponics is that the greenhouse plants do not draw nourishment from the earth. In this experiment, they rely on the nutrition present in seed that is germinated, precisely watered, and harvested after about 10 days of growth. Thus, more seed is required for the production of an equivalent amount of forage (compared to that traditionally grown in open fields), but with far less water use.

The hydroponic greenhouse also controls and modifies light reaching the plants. Experiments will reduce light intensity and restrict certain frequencies, using a variety of shading mechanisms to avoid overheating and improve plant growth.

How It Works The dense array of sensors in the 8m by 18m (26 ft by 59 ft) greenhouse will monitor light, temperature, relative

R & D

Continued next page

humidity, and air pressure. The data, collected every few minutes, will be sent by phone line to a remote computer for analysis. “We expect that the [greenhouse] system will not be as slow-moving or spatially homogeneous as one might think in terms of environmental change,” Pate says. “Every time the water system pops on, the local temperature around the plants drops relatively quickly.”

“We want to be aware of microclimate variances,” says Pate. “We want to know how feed grows from changes in temperature and location and time of watering. That will help us modify the design and operation of the greenhouses.”

Whenever a humidity sensor or a back-up timer trips a control circuit, water sprays from quarter-inch nozzles for 20 seconds into plants growing in a series of plastic trays stacked on metal racks. To lessen labor and also protect against mold, researchers are exploring the development and use of trays that themselves would be edible by livestock, thus making washing

and sanitizing trays unnecessary. Such tray material could also add nutrition content to the overall forage product, making it a more balanced ration for the livestock. Consumption of water, seed, and labor also are being monitored.

Visit www.sandia.gov.

Water Scarcity Threatens Global Businessfrom the Pacific Institute

Businesses around the world, from beverage companies to chip manufacturers, are failing to prepare for the serious economic and political risks posed by growing competition for fresh water, the threat of water contamination, and rising water-related costs. These risks can lead to plant closures, supply-chain disruptions, and public opposition to local business activities.

That’s the message of a new research paper by the Pacific Institute, a

nonpartisan research group based in Oakland, California. The report identifies a range of worrisome trends that impact businesses in almost every sector, and recommends steps that companies can take to meet these challenges head-on.

The study, “Freshwater Resources: Managing the Risks Facing the Private Sector,” outlines a range of problematic trends: growing water scarcity in the face of skyrocketing demand and increasing competition; community concerns about industrial water use and pollution; and potential changes in water availability and quality stemming from climate change. Severe water shortages can lead to supply chain interruptions, poor product quality, and even loss of license to operate. Already, local governments have forced some multinational companies to close major factories due to concerns about the impacts of their water use.

The report recommends ten steps companies can take to reduce their water-related impacts on the environment and

R&D (continued)


local communities, and help protect their operations and their shareholders from business risks related to water. These steps include measuring their current water use; establishing a water policy with specific goals and performance targets; improving w ater efficiency and conservation efforts; and engaging suppliers, community groups, and outside partners in an open dialogue on the issue.

Visit www.pacinst.org.

Reduced Snowfall Linked to Air Pollution from the Desert Research Institute

A three-year study by Desert Research Institute (DRI) scientists Randy Borys and Doug Lowenthal, in collaboration with the National Center for Atmospheric Research, indicates that polluted air can reduce winter snowpack contributed during individual storms by 50 percent. Their research is zeroing in on the long-term reduction in annual snowpack, which could be as much as 25 percent.

This is especially bad news for drought-ravaged western states, such as Colorado, Nevada, Arizona, and New Mexico, that depend on runoff from snowpack to fill their streams, rivers, and lakes, and recharge the groundwater.

“In normal years, you might not notice a decrease in the water content of snow, but after five years of drought, every drop counts,” Borys said. Even though pollution does not create droughts—which are caused by larger atmospheric and climatic conditions—dirty air could be making the situation worse.

Tiny (0.1–1 micrometers in diameter) naturally occurring and pollutant-formed aerosol particles, known as cloud condensation nuclei, form microscopic cloud droplets, and these droplets typically form ice crystals or combine with other crystals to form snowflakes. The work of Borys, Lowenthal, and others has shown that when aerosol particles from air pollution increase the number of cloud condensation nuclei, the number of droplets also increases, but the average diameter of cloud droplets is reduced. This process ties up more of the available moisture in

the cloud, and the smaller, more numerous droplets essentially disperse and evaporate before accumulating into droplets large enough to fall to the ground.

Sulfate, nitrate, and possibly some organic compounds in the form of tiny atmospheric particles are the culprits. These particles are the byproducts of almost any combustion process, including natural fires. However, the persistent generation of pollution containing these minute aerosol particles,

day in and day out, sets the stage for the process to occur.

The scientists have been conducting their research at DRI’s Storm Peak Laboratory atop Mt. Werner in the Rockies, near Steamboat Springs, Colorado. The laboratory is at an elevation of 10,500 feet in an area that experiences the maximum snowfall for northwest Colorado.

Visit stormpeak.dri.edu.



Common Waters, Diverging Streams: Linking Institutions and Water Management in Arizona, California and Coloradoby William Blomquist, Edella Schlager, and Tanya Heikkila. RFF Press, $30.95 (pbk).

Reviewed by Jim Holway, Ph.D. – Assistant Director, Arizona Department of Water Resources

Common Waters is a timely and informative study of conjunctive water management at a time of increasingly scarce water resources. Conjunctive management involves coordinating the utilization of different water sources. Whether for balancing seasonal peaks in supply and demand, maintaining surface water flows, ensuring reliability during drought, freeing up resources to meet environmental needs, or securing supplies for additional growth, the authors advocate the benefits of conjunctively managing our varied water supplies.

Common Waters focuses on one aspect of conjunctive use: underground storage of surplus surface waters through direct and in-lieu groundwater recharge. The authors’ stated goal was to describe and document existing projects in Arizona, California, and Colorado and improve understanding of how institutional changes relate to incentives to engage in more efficient water use.

Part 1 provides an excellent overview of the advantages of conjunctive management as well as the opportunities and obstacles to implementing conjunctive management for different water sources. Hydrologic and institutional characteristics cited as facilitating conjunctive management include: clear specification of water rights; uniform rules for all sources of water; ability to conserve water without losing rights; transferability of water supplies and rights; clear rights to recover stored water and protection of those supplies from other users; the ability to cooperate on financing

projects and assessing fees; and having large aquifers with significant storage space and the infrastructure to move surplus water.

Part 2 contains a valuable summary of the three states’ water resources and institutional frameworks. The authors were particularly intrigued by 1) Arizona’s

state-imposed groundwater management policies, 2) Colorado’s watershed-level system of water governance, and 3) California’s decentralized system of local special districts.

The authors conclude that, “California’s basin by basin decentralized approach may make it harder to initiate conjunctive management projects, but it does not inhibit the size or longevity of those that

emerge.” In each of the twelve California basins with projects included in the study, some form of locally initiated, basin-wide groundwater governance had been implemented to facilitate conjunctive management. A principal purpose of many of the projects, some of which have been operating since the 1920s, is to accommodate seasonal peaking and overdraft recovery.

In Arizona, the last of the three states to develop recharge projects, excess Central Arizona Project (CAP) water is the principal source of supply. Recharge is done principally 1) to meet state regulatory requirements for an assured water supply, or 2) to firm CAP supplies through the Arizona Water Banking Authority. The state’s quantified water rights system, requirements for an assured water supply, and 1986 statutory amendments provide a regulatory framework to facilitate recharge projects.

Unlike California or Arizona, the principal purpose of Colorado’s projects initially was to maintain surface water flows during peak demand times while allowing continued use of tributary groundwater. Recharge projects are operated near major rivers in eastern Colorado so

that recharge returns to the river during low flow periods and ensures sufficient supplies for senior surface water rights holders. More recently, Colorado has expanded conjunctive management projects to meet interstate river compacts and federal environmental requirements for specified flows. Colorado has an institutional framework within which water appropriators are encouraged to govern themselves; state-maintained water courts facilitate this process.

Part 3 contains recommendations for improved conjunctive use of water in the three states. Recommendations include:

In California, establish a system of specific and transferable water rights; clarify rights for underground storage and recovery; revise health regulations to facilitate effluent recharge; and establish a statewide database on conjunctive management projects.

In Arizona, revise statutes to facilitate multi-jurisdictional financing of projects; facilitate conjunctive management in rural communities; and devise clearer rules for sub-basin management.

In Colorado, fully integrate tributary groundwater and surface water, allowing withdrawals from groundwater storage during shortages, even when it depletes surface water flows, then replacing the groundwater during times of excess.

Common Waters is a thoroughly researched, well-presented, and thoughtful analysis of the history and future of recharge and recovery of surplus surface water in three western states. However, true conjunctive management is much broader than that. Reflecting on this book, I believe that in Arizona – and elsewhere – research, development of hydrologic models, and long-range planning are needed to optimize the role conjunctive management can play in our water supply portfolios and to understand the limits of recharge or of pumping and replenishment, in meeting long-term water supply needs.

Visit RFF Press at www.rff.org. Contact Jim Holway at [email protected].

IN PRINT


January 9-13 American Meteorological Society. AMS Forum: Living with a Limited Water Supply. San Diego, CA. www.ametsoc.org

January 14-17 National Ground Water Association. 2004 Theis Conference: Environmental Decision Making: Restoration versus Risk Reduction. Sedona, AZ. www.ngwa.org/pdf/e/conf/0501145100agenda.pdf

January 23-26 American Academy of Sciences. 1st International Conference on Environmental Science and Technology. New Orleans, LA. www.aasci.org/conference

January 25-28 Texas Groundwater Association. TGWA Annual Convention and Trade Show. Lubbock, TX. Phone 512-472-7437.

January 27-28 CLE International. Law of the Rio Grande SuperConference. Albuquerque, NM. www.cle.com/upcoming/list_month.shtml#January%202005

January 27-28 CLE International. Texas Wetlands. Houston, TX. www.cle.com/upcoming/list_month.shtml#January%202005

February 1-3 Nevada Water Resources Association. Annual Conference: Growth, Water, and the Quality of Life in Nevada. Reno, NV. www.nvwra.org/news.asp

February 14-15 American Water Resources Association. National Water Resources Policy Dialogue. Phoenix, AZ. www.awra.org/meetings/Tucson2005/index.html

February 14-18 Applied Technology Institute. Remote Sensing for Earth Science Applications. Beltsville, MD. www.aticourses.com/remote_sensing_earth.htm

Feb. 28-March 4 Princeton Groundwater Inc. The Groundwater Pollution and Hydrology Course. San Francisco, CA. www. princeton-groundwater.com

March 7-8 CLE International. Colorado Water Law. Denver, CO. www.cle.com

March 10-11 Government Institutes. Environmental Site Assessments. Las Vegas, NV. www.govinst.com

March 13-18 University of Arizona. Colorado River Field Studies. Colorado River from Las Vegas to Yuma (via roads). Contact Richard H. Hawkins at 520-621-7273 or [email protected].

March 14-18 Princeton Groundwater Inc. The Remediation Course. Denver, CO. www.princeton-groundwater.com

March 16-18 University of Arizona Department of Hydrology and Water Resources. Applied Stochastic Subsurface Hydrogeology and Environmental Geophysics. Tucson, AZ. tian.hwr.arizona.edu/yeh/short_course.html

April 3-7 Environmental and Engineering Geophysical Society. Symposium on the Application of Geophysics to Engineering and Environmental Problems. Atlanta, GA. www.eegs.org/sageep/index.html

April 6 University of Arizona Water Resources Research Center. Annual Conference: Water and the Environment. Tucson, AZ. ag.arizona.edu/AZWATER

April 11-12 CLE International. California Water Law and Policy. San Francisco, CA. www.cle.com.

April 17-20 National Ground Water Association. 2005 Ground Water Summit. San Antonio, TX. www.ngwa.org/e/conf/0504175095.shtml

April 17-21 Mine Waste Technology Program at Montana Tech. Mine Design, Operations & Closure Conference ’05. Polson, MT. multimedia.mtech.edu/mineop

April 25-27 University of California Center for Water Resources. International Salinity Forum – Managing Saline Soils and Water: Science, Technology, and Social Issues. Riverside, CA. www.waterresources.ucr.edu/index.php?content=news_events/intlsf_meeting/SF05pageDW.htm

April 25-28 Government Institutes. Clean Water Compliance Institute. Phoenix, AZ. www.govinst.com

May 2-6 Government Institutes. U.S. Environmental Laws and Regulations (May 2-4), Advanced Environmental Laws and Regulations (May 5-6). Phoenix, AZ. www.govinst.com

May 9-13 Government Institutes. Environmental Compliance Bootcamp. Phoenix, AZ. www.govinst.com

May 15-19 Environmental and Water Resources Institute of ASCE. World Water & Environmental Congress. Anchorage, AK. www.asce.org/conferences/ewri2005/index.cfm

May 26-27 National Ground Water Association. MTBE and Perchlorate Conference. San Francisco, CA. www.ngwa.org/e/index.shtmlwww.ngwa.org/e/index.shtmlwww.ngwa.org/e/

T H E C A L E N D A R

MARCH 2005

JANUARY 2005

FEBRUARY 2005

APRIL 2005

MAY 2005


��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

2221 East Street, Suite 101 • Golden, CO, USA 80401www.RockWare.com • Fax 303-278-4099

303-278-3534 x104��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

Adriel Heisey, a photographer...

Documents

Transcript of Adriel Heisey, a photographer...