Bringing the Colorado River Delta Back to Life

from NASA the Colorado Delta in 2004

Yesterday, March 23rd , the Morelos Dam along the US–Mexico border near Yuma, Arizona, opened their gates and began releasing 34,000,000,000 gallons of water downstream that will make up an eight-week long pulse of water intended to mimic a spring flood. Since 1960, when Glen Canyon Dam was finished, the Colorado River has rarely flowed to the sea, and the river’s delta a once alive estuary started to fade and dry out. Now, scientists, environmentalists and politicians are trying to bring the Colorado River Delta back to life.

The water that will make up this pulse was slowly collected from releases from the Hoover, Davis and Parker dams removing some water from the parched west during this extended drought. The water has collect behind the most southerly dam on the river, the Morelos, which sits on the Mexico-US border and normally diverts the last of the Colorado toward agricultural lands in Mexico. The demand for the water of the Colorado has increased and yet the flow (except in the years of the El Niño rains) has not met the demand. Part of the problem has been lack of adequate water management and conservation, but that is only part of the problem.

Control of the water and flow of the Colorado River is part of a 1944 Treaty between the United States and Mexico. The United States and Mexico have spent years negotiating a new Colorado River agreement between the two nations changing the allocation of water. The agreement, called Minute 319, requires the US to provide $21 million to help improve water-saving measures in Mexico (for example lining irrigation canals) and the United States to forego some of its water rights this year to free up water for the pulse and to guarantee a minimum flow to the delta for environmental purposes.

The Minute 319 agreement changes the framework of water law that has always been “First in time, first in rights.” Now the U.S. and Mexico will share the surplus when and if water is plentiful and share shortage when water is scarce. The agreement also commits the two nations to work together on water conservation and restoration of the long dried out delta estuary by guaranteeing a small continuous flow, totaling an additional 16,000,000,000 gallons to the delta to sustain it over the next three years. It's a small but continuous trickle that researchers expect will bring a portion of the delta back to life in the weeks after the pulse.

The Colorado River delta like all estuaries is an incredibly complex ecosystem that we are only beginning to understand. Estuaries are productive ecosystems and habitats. The type of habitat is determined by geology, salinity and climate. Estuaries are fragile ecosystems that are very susceptible to disturbances both natural and those created by man. By diverting the flow of the Colorado River fresh water flow for irrigation and drinking water supplies changes flow, quantity of fresh water if any entering the estuary, and impacts the balance within the ecology. As the ecosystem of estuaries declines, species die out, coastlines experience excessive erosion by wind and tidal action. It is going to take knowledge, effort and resources (wealth in all forms but especially water rights) to restore the delta.

Here in the Chesapeake bay watershed we have reached the point in population density and development that during times of drought, natural flows on the Potomac are not always sufficient to allow water withdrawals by the utilities (including power generation which takes an awesome amount of water) while still maintaining a minimum flow in the river for sustaining aquatic resources. For more than two centuries the waters of the Potomac seemed unlimited so that our region is not hampered and tied by water allocation agreements created almost a century ago that bind the waters of the Colorado River to fixed and rigid allocations. Instead, the Interstate Commission on the Potomac River Basin, ICPRB, allocates and manages water resources of the river to improve reliability of the water supply and ensured maintenance of in-stream flows to meet minimum aquatic habitat requirements.

It is unknown if this can be accomplished for the Colorado River whose management is complicated by interstate boarders, water rights that have a basis in law and are truly a form of wealth, but cannot be fairly monetized, sold, or transferred without addressing water and groundwater law in the west. In the third year of drought in California when Governor Jerry Brown has declared a drought emergency and stopped all the water allocations from the State Water Project, which delivers water from Northern California through the California Delta to Central valley Farmers the Imperial Valley, east of Los Angeles, still has plenty of water.

The farmers there are unaffected by the drought. The Imperial Valley is not connected to the State Water Project; its water comes directly from the Colorado River, which has continued allocations despite the need for the water for the Minute 319 agreement. The Imperial Valley’s share of water is assured by the terms of the 1922 Colorado River Compact and subsequent agreements among the seven states that depend on the Colorado River water for life. The Imperial Valley farmers were the first to tap the Colorado for irrigation water and in in water law in the western states, one rule is supreme: "First in time, first in right."

The framework of the Minute 319 agreement to water management changes that absolute. While it creates benefits for water users on both sides of the border, demonstrating that with a broad approach to river and water management, there is room to negotiate and serve multiple interests. It is also a model that would take water and what is truly wealth from the Imperial Valley farmers if applied elsewhere in the Colorado River basin. Water, water rights, environmental needs are complicated in the west and not only impact the wealth of the farmers, but the cost of food. Cheap water and fuel mean cheap food. A century ago food accounted for about a fifth of the household budget of the typical U. S. citizen, now it is about 3%, though only a few years ago it was under 2%.

As part of the changes that are coming in the allocations of the Colorado River waters, water rights must be fairly monetized so that they can be bought and sold to allow future agreements elsewhere on the Colorado to be a win for all stakeholders not just those parties who advocate the restoration of the delta’s environment and the Colorado River itself, but to include the holders of the water rights and the U.S. consumer.

Dividing Up the Groundwater in Nevada

In the arid west water has value. Once granted, water rights in Nevada have the standing of both real and personal property and can be conveyed as with the real property or specifically excluded in the deed. Water rights can be purchased or sold as personal property and change the water's point of diversion, manner of use and place of use. Within the Las Vegas Valley,  there are speculators who buy and sell older water rights that are permanent, which means whomever buys them is generally free to pump them from most anywhere else in the Las Vegas Valley.  Unlike the east, where water groundwater belongs to the overlying land and surface water is allocated based on the riparian doctrine that gives an owner of land bordering on water the right to use that water, in Nevada water rights are granted by the State Engineer.  

All water within the boundaries of the state of Nevada,whether above or beneath the surface of the ground, belongs to the public and is subject to appropriation for beneficial use to remote parties. Nevada’s first water law passed in 1866 was based on a system of first users have the first rights to water. The Office of the State Engineer was created by the Nevada Legislature in 1903 to manage the surface waters of the state. It was not until the passage of the Nevada General Water Law Act of 1913 that the State Engineer was granted jurisdiction over wells tapping artesian water or water in definable underground aquifers. The 1939 Nevada Underground Water Act granted the State Engineer jurisdiction over all groundwater in the state.

Now, with almost the entire surface water allocated (and possible over allocated in the recent drought) towns on behalf of local industry and future growth are attempting to lock up water rights and the wealth that goes with it. The town of West Wendover, Nevada on behalf of itself and Wendover, Utah has filed permits to obtain 650 million gallons of water each year from the Pilot Valley groundwater basin after having a previous request for an increase in their allocation from their current groundwater supply denied by the State Engineer. A 1971 federal groundwater study determined that the Pilot Valley groundwater basin could provide 1.5 billion gallons of water annually. This data is old and was produced at a time before groundwater was as well understood as it is today. Even today groundwater sustainability is still not fully understood. In addition, there are droughts, climate changes; water draws from surface water changes the recharge rate of the groundwater and residents of Pilot Valley claim that the prolonged drought has lowered groundwater levels in their wells. If true, this brings into question what the sustainable level of consumption is for this groundwater basin.  

The U.S. Geological Survey did not begin quantitative analysis of the major groundwater systems of the United States until 1978 and since that time there has been tremendous evolution in the understanding of and ability to model groundwater systems. Older attempts to model groundwater systems neglected relevant hydraulic and geological processes as well as representing inappropriate processes and using mathematical simplifications and did not even include a connection to surface water. Clearly, new studies need to be performed before significant water rights are granted. The State Engineer has the authority to require a hydrological, environmental or any other study necessary prior to final determination of an application for water rights.

from SNWA web site

This is not a one-off application for water rights. Throughout the portions of the arid west that allocate groundwater rights communities have been attempting to secure more groundwater rights for their communities and none has been as active as  Las Vegas and the Southern Nevada  Water Authority, SNWA. In light of ongoing drought conditions in the Colorado River Basin and continued population growth, the SNWA continues to seek groundwater rights to an additional 44 billion gallons of non-Colorado River resources groundwater that it can pipe to the city. The State Engineers approval of the applications has been challenged and will be heard in the Nevada Supreme Court. The average Las Vegas house and family uses about 450 gallons of water a day which translates to about 163,000 a year, but the SNWA is engaged in a major water conservation and reuse program to reduce the household use by 199 gallons per day. As SNWA points out for the west to survive, they will have to use significantly less water per person in the future.  The state of Nevada has updated their drought response plan for the first time in a decade as the Colorado River system is facing the worst drought on record. The water level of Lake Mead, the reservoir for Las Vegas has dropped more than 100 feet since January 2000.

No Water for Texas Rice Farmers

On Friday, March 2, 2012 the Lower Colorado River Authority, LCRA, announced that for the first time in its 78 year history they would not be delivering irrigation water to most downstream farmers this year under emergency relief granted by the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality to the obligations of the existing water contracts. According to Texas state water law, “first in time is first in right.” Downstream rice farmers were given first water rights in the Colorado basin, and these rights are senior to LCRA's water rights for the Highland Lakes. In fact, without the support of the rice farmers, the Highland Lakes and dams might never have been built. Rice farmers were among the strongest supporters of building the Highland Lakes and dams in the 1930s to reduce flooding and make water available during droughts. Nonetheless, it is most of the rice farmers who will not be receiving their water this year.

Overall, approximately 60% of all the world's freshwater withdrawals go to irrigation. Texas’ use of irrigation water falls right in that range. Without irrigation, rice could never be grown in the dry lands of Texas and the large scale farming operations could not exist. The system of water rights that developed in Texas assured for generations the allocation of water to agriculture. The water rights system as conceived and administered in Texas and the western states was not designed to conserve water. It was developed in a time when population was still sparse, water supplies were believed to be plentiful and development and growth were to be encouraged. The system was designed to protect the water and work necessary to build farms in the west. This management scheme is contractual and has produced agricultural practices that may be unsustainable in the long term as overall water demand increases.

Texas rice farmers count on their water allocations to irrigate the land along the Gulf Coast. Texas usually ranks as the nation's fourth or fifth highest producing rice-growing state, producing about 7% of the nation's rice. The farmers in the Colorado River basin make up almost three-quarters of the state's total rice acreage. Without surface irrigation water, many farmers will be able to plant only a fraction of the rice they usually grow, and some farmers won't plant any. Farmer who plan on planting this year will pump groundwater to irrigate the rice. Last year downstream farmers received about 368,000 acre-feet of Highland Lakes water. LCRA operates the storage and pumping plants that supply water through a 1,100-miles of irrigation canals in Matagorda, Wharton and Colorado counties. The facilities are organized into four service areas, Gulf Coast, Lakeside, Garwood and Pierce Ranch, and are capable of transporting water to 91,500 acres of farm land annually.

Even with the recent rains, lakes Buchanan and Travis, the region’s reservoirs, are at only 42% capacity. The combined storage of the lakes was 847,000 acre-feet on March 1, 2012. This was below the 850,000 acre-feet level required to be in the lakes on March 1st to allow the release of irrigation water to farmers in the Lakeside, Gulf Coast and Pierce Ranch irrigation districts under the September 2011 agreement to void the existing water contract obligations to those farmers. Farmers in the Garwood irrigation operation will still receive some water from the Highland Lakes this year, up to 20,000 acre-feet, because they hold senior water rights that were cut back, not cancelled. Had LCRA released irrigation water to the bulk of the rice farmers it would only have been 25% of the allocation, but the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality granted LCRA's request for emergency relief from contract obligations this past December, otherwise downstream farmers would have been entitled to as much as 178,000 acre-feet of water from the Highland Lakes this year.

LCRA operates lakes Buchanan and Travis under a state-approved Water Management Plan that allocates water amongst users. Last fall a stakeholder group determined that the 850,000 acre-feet level was the minimum level necessary to protect the cities and industries from water shortages. If water levels fall below 600,000 acre-feet and the LCRA Board of Directors are required under the Water Management Plan to declare a drought worse than the “Drought of Record”, the 10-year drought of the 1940s and 50s that is considered the worst drought in state history. When a Drought of Record is declared, the cities and industry are required to reduce water use by 20%. The 850,000 acre-feet level was chosen to ensure that water would not be released for irrigation in 2012 and then cut off mid-crop wasting the water if the combined storage fell to 600,000 acre-feet triggering the Drought of Record condition. Farmers pay considerably less for water than cities and industry and, therefore, their water is considered "interruptible" during a severe drought.

This is a another step in changing the historic rights to and allocations of water in the west as regional droughts and ever increasing demand stress the water supply. Though “on average” the United States uses less than 8% of the water that falls as precipitation within our borders annually, unfortunately, precipitation varies from the average significantly on a regional basis and thus, allocations and supply on a regional basis will remain a problem especially in locations where irrigations is the major water use (mostly the western states). The demand for water is not responsive to supply variations, and the margin for error decreases as demand for water grows. Yet, unbelievable enough Texas grown brown rice was on sale yesterday at Giant. I bought 15 pounds.

Who will Control your Water

Fresh water supply poses a real and looming environmental risk. Regional shortages of water will drive decisions that will impact our future.

According to the US Census Bureau there are 312 million people in the United States. The water that exists on the planet is finite, but always moving as part of the water cycle or hydrologic cycle, on, above, and below the surface of the Earth. The good news about water is that “on average” the United States uses less than 8% of the water that falls as precipitation within our borders annually. Unfortunately, precipitation varies from that average significantly on a regional basis and over time, and our need for water is often greatest where there is the least precipitation because of the need for irrigation. In addition, only the cities on the great lakes have adequate precipitation and water storage to supply their population’s water needs, so our urban center have become very used to thinking of appropriating water from nearby regions to the cities.

As population rises, the demand for fresh water for drinking, domestic use, for industry (especially power generation) and for agriculture increases. The demand for food and the water that is essential to produce food grows with population and wealth. Globally, farming is estimated to account for 60% -70% of fresh water use. Irrigated agricultural consumes over 75% of the water in California, which produces 17.6 % of U.S. crops, and 7 % of the U.S. livestock and livestock products. California produces about half of U.S. grown fruits, nuts, and vegetables. Several of these crops are currently produced only in California. In the United States we have used the various complicated, layered and hidden subsidies within the various “farm bills” and subsidized water to complicate the business of farming and obscure the true costs of food in America.

This past spring, even as the Mississippi River basin was inundated with water, large portions of the arid west were struggling with drought. Farmers in the west pumped groundwater (unsustainably) to produce their crops. Regional water supply and allocation of that water is a growing problem especially in the western states which are arid, dependent on irrigation and have multi-state water right compacts. One of the best known of these Compacts is the 1922 Colorado River Compact, negotiated by the seven basin states (Colorado, Nevada, Utah, New Mexico, Wyoming, Arizona, California, ) divided the Colorado River basin into upper and lower portions, allotted consumptive use of the Colorado’s water on the basis of territory rather than prior appropriation. Before this agreement was negotiated allocation of water rights (ownership) was based on historic use, first to use the water owned it in perpetuity. In a land where water was wealth and all water was diverted from its natural location, this was how it was done. The allocation of water rights based on territory allowed development to proceed in the lower basin (essentially California) while safeguarding supplies for the upper basin. Then, as now, California's growth and demand for water was viewed with concern by her neighbors.

The problem is that the allocations promised were more than 100% of the water available and the demand for water has exceeded the supply. Specifically, the amount of water allocated under the Colorado Compact was based on an expectation that the river's average flow was 16.4 million acre feet per year. Subsequent tree ring studies, however, have concluded that the long-term average water flow of the Colorado is significantly less. According to the University of Arizona, a better estimate would have been 13.2 million acre feet at the time of the Colorado Compact and the records going back to paleolithic times (more than 10,000 years ago) indicates periods of mega-droughts in the distant past. During the drought of 2001-2006 the Colorado River flow was estimated at 11 million acre feet and hit a low of 6 million acre feet in 2002. The situation was critical bordering on regional rationing when the drought ended. More than 23 million people of the lower basin are at least partially dependent upon the water resources of the Colorado River. Almost 74% of them reside in the greater Los Angeles and San Diego areas. The deep snow pact and rain of last winter in northern California has taken has taken emergency rationing off the table- until the next drought.

Population growth, increased food production and increased power production all consume more and more water. The water available from the Colorado River has not increased with the increased demand and may even be falling. Even without climate change, paleoclimate records show a history of tremendous droughts in the region, and now more than 35 million people (in the upper and lower basins) depend upon the Colorado River’s waters for their water supply. The need for water is always growing. California is the most populous state in the nation and Nevada was identified as the fastest-growing state in the country in the 2010 census growing over 35% since 2000. Despite aggressive conservation activities the region simply does not have enough water to meet the projected demand. Las Vegas, was in the midst of a building boom when the drought hit. While adding 400,000 people they were able to reduce water use by a third by the implementation of draconian conservation measures. This was city and suburban consumption, not agricultural or power generation use of water which is much more difficult to cut.

The states of the Colorado Compact need more water. Overuse is killing the Colorado water basin which suffers from decimated aquatic ecosystems, overdrawn and irreparably damaged groundwater aquifers, and polluted agricultural and urban runoff. California has focused all its attention on developing a plan for reducing carbon dioxide emissions which is unlikely to prevent climate change, but they have failed to develop a workable water budget (or a balanced state budget for that matter). For two decades the Pacific Institute has called for a revamp of river management to protect endangered fish species and critical ecosystem elements, free up water for restoration of the Colorado River delta, and eliminate long-term groundwater overdraft throughout the basin. California and the other Colorado Compact states could not face the simple fact of a limited water supply and ignored the warnings, preferring to think about that tomorrow.

Even the conservation measures implemented in Las Vegas and throughout the region are not enough to ensure the long term water supply. The Southern Nevada Water Authority has requested to build a pipeline to transfer 65 billion gallons of water from northern Nevada to Las Vegas. The state will decide in January whether to proceed with that plan. The project has encountered stiff opposition from conservationists and rural communities against tapping northern groundwater to fuel more growth in southern Nevada. The pressure to push the project forward is off after the large snow pact of last winter inundated the area in the spring thaw and filled Lake Mead for the first time in a decade. Lake Meade sits on the Nevada-Arizona border and was formed in 1935 after the construction of Hoover Dam. Lake Mead and the upstream Lake Powell are the major water storage facilities in the Colorado Compact system. Roughly 96% of Lake Mead's water comes from melted snow in the upper Colorado River basin states: Colorado, Utah, New Mexico and Wyoming.

Las Vegas is only one small area of the Colorado Compact. Regional politics demands maintaining a vibrant agricultural sector, quenching the thirst of growing urban and suburban, growing economies that also demand water for power and industry, despite the limitations of the water supply. Politicians do not seem able to make the hard choices that will balance their water budgets. Instead the politicians came up with the idea to investigate the “Long-Term Augmentation of the Water Supply of the Colorado River System.” The study commissioned by the Colorado Compact states and the federal government identified 12 long-term augmentation options: desalination of both brackish water and ocean water, coalbed methane produced water, recharging groundwater from other surface sources, reduction of consumptive use of water for power generation, reservoir evaporation reduction, storm water storage, vegetation management, importing water via boat, water reuse, weather modification, and importation of water from the Midwest. Former Governor of New Mexico, Bill Richardson suggested “compacts” with the great lake states to import water to the drier western states under a federal water Czar. One of the ideas explored by the Southern Nevada Water Authority is to pipe 1,000 cubic feet of water per second from the Mississippi River 1,000 miles west to the Colorado River. They estimated that this aqueduct-pipeline would cost $11.4 billion to construct and an unknown amount of money to operate and maintain. Pat Mulroy, general manager of the Southern Nevada Water Authority, who is responsible for ensuring that the 2 million residents of Las Vegas have water argues that this plan could flood proof the Mississippi River Basin while recharging the depleted Ogallala Aquifer under the Great Plains and maintain and increase agriculture on the eastern side of the Colorado River. The plan is to remake nature with a modern era of big infrastructure projects rather than accept the limits of nature and locating large water use projects where water is plentiful. Water control and allocation would be another federal power under this water augmentation plan.

More Thoughts on Groundwater Management in Virginia

In its most recent session the General Assembly of Virginia passed senate bill 569 which creates a State Water Supply Plan Advisory Committee as an advisors to assist the Department of Environmental Quality in developing and implementing the state water resources plan. The committee will meet twice a year and be composed of citizen representatives of most of the water stakeholders. The committee is not compensated and will consist of citizen members representing industrial and municipal water users; public and private water providers; agricultural, conservation, and environmental organizations; state and federal agencies; and university faculty with expertise in water resources-related issues.
Who on this committee will represent me. I am one of the 1,000,000 Virginians dependent on a private well. I am a landowner and a stakeholder in any resource allocation plan because I own my water resources. I do not think that the State Water Control Board can adequately develop a state water resources plan; without the input of the citizens of Virginia any water plan will impact sustainability of our way of life, property value, personal freedom and economic opportunity. There is no life without water. The beauty of Virginia the quality of our environment is dependent on water. The Director of the Department of Environmental Quality needs to consider the citizen in planning of water supply and water resources planning in Virginia.

Though the focus of the concern has been the two groundwater management areas, one on the Eastern Shore and another covering the James-York Peninsula and Southside Virginia, Fairfax County is vulnerable to running out of water in the next drought. Our freshwater resources need to be managed as a whole. The utilization of groundwater resources in an unsustainable manner can result in impacts to the entire region, including the decrease in water level and aquifer storage, reductions in stream flow and lake levels, loss of wetland and riparian ecosystems, land subsidence, saltwater intrusion and changes in groundwater quality. Each groundwater system or basin is unique and must be managed individually, and the data necessary to understand and manage water resources must be gathered locally over time to track and respond to changes in groundwater quantity and quality as well as stream flow. All groundwater is not equal and there a consequences of withdrawing water from an aquifer beyond its recharge rate.

I personally sit on the northeastern most portion of the Culpeper Basin. Fairfax county is only a couple of miles away and when they run out of water, I fear they will look to Prince William and I recall that Los Angeles destroyed the Owens Valley when it took the water rights to the entire Owens River. Owens Lake and the surrounding area became a desert dust bowl. The water and its wealth were taken elsewhere.

Groundwater Management in Virginia

The Virginia Ground Water Management Act of 1992 mandates the regulation of large groundwater withdrawals in certain portions of the Commonwealth to prevent adverse impacts due to over utilization of the resource. There are currently two proposed changes to the regulations. It has been proposed to expand the Eastern Virginia Ground Water Management Area to include the Counties of Caroline, King and Queen, Gloucester, Mathews, Middlesex, Essex, King George, Westmoreland, Richmond, Lancaster and Northumberland; parts of Spotsylvania, Stafford, Prince William, Fairfax and Arlington Counties; and the City of Alexandria. This would expand groundwater withdrawals beyond the confines of the Tidewater, west of the fall zone, into another groundwater basin. Currently, this Ground Water Management Area includes every county and city south of the York River and its tributaries and east of I 95, except Gloucester, Mathews, Middlesex Counties. The proposed expansion would bring these three counties on the edge of the Chesapeake Bay, and the corresponding area north of the York and its tributaries, into the regulated area. The boundaries of the Eastern Shore Ground Water Management Area would remain unchanged.

Ground water levels in the Tidewater region of Virginia’s coastal plain are continuing to decline. Impacts from groundwater withdrawals are propagating along the fall zone into the coastal plain and have the potential to interfere with wells in these areas. However, you cannot manage the several groundwater basins as if they were a single basin, but you cannot ignore the interrelation between the basins. The smallest of examples in this area is Bull Run which feeds the Occoquan Reservoir originates in the Piedmont. The coastal plain has been the area of the most intense growth and the area was forecast by Virginia Tech to have inadequate reserves to meet the next drought if not addressed. Given current ground water declines, the entire coastal plain aquifer system must be managed to maintain a sustainable future supply of ground water. Virginia is blessed with what appears to be rich resources of water, but they are not infinite. Surprisingly little hard data on the groundwater has been collected. As a much wiser man than I pointed out, without data there can be no understanding of our resources and our planet. What level of withdrawal does the Agency propose to allow in each basin?

The second proposed change is a little frightening because it both ambiguous and seemingly ambitious in its reach: the Board and DEQ propose “to consider amending the Ground Water Withdrawal Regulation, 9 VAC 25 610 to address the increasing demand on limited groundwater resources, changes to the administrative review process, and regulatory changes necessitated by new information on the coastal plain aquifer system.” Virginia is estimated to use 188 million gallons of groundwater each day to supply public water systems, industry, agriculture, commercial operations and mining. This excludes over 40 million gallons a day that supplies private domestic well in the state including my well. While applaud the agency’s proactive stance, to take action to manage and maintain our water resources before crisis strikes, I wonder how can the DEQ even propose regulations on diverse geology, demand and groundwater basins and do so without data. Though the goal is laudable, what methods are they proposing to manage, control, protect and allocate a resource that is not well understood? The agencies’ reasons for proposing this action echo and elaborate on their explanation of reasons for proposing to expand the Ground Water Management Area, but that is not enough.
Even more ominous, the Board is preparing “to address for which users and for what purposes this finite resource should be allocated” and “to address what constitutes an adequate margin of safety and what technical criteria are defensible for determining whether or not to issue a permit and for what amounts.” All of this appears to signal a readiness and desire to control the most valuable resource in the commonwealth of Virginia. Without water there can be no life, no economy. More importantly, the Agency seems to have determined that allocation of water resources will be performed by government with a strategy or manner of its choosing. The agency proposes to allocate the most valuable resource in the commonwealth of Virginia without answering the question of How should water be allocated. The Agency is determined to proceed to avoid ground water declines. Before the Agency proceeds to manage the groundwater use for Virginia, the people must determine how this resource should be managed.

Groundwater the Fluid of Life

To survive over time, a population must live within the carrying capacity of its ecosystem, which represents a form of natural capital. One of the most important elements of the ecosystem is potable water. Without water there can be no life. As populations grow water is needed for drinking, bathing, to support irrigated agriculture and industry.

Unlike other natural resources or raw materials, groundwater is present throughout the world. Possibilities for its abstraction vary greatly from place to place, owing to rainfall conditions and the distribution of aquifers (rock and sand layers in whose pore spaces the groundwater sits). Generally, groundwater is renewed only during a part of each year through precipitation, but can be abstracted year-round. Provided that there is adequate replenishment, and that the source is protected from pollution, groundwater can be abstracted indefinitely.

Groundwater forms the invisible, subsurface part of the natural water cycle, in which evaporation, precipitation, seepage and discharge are the main components. The “visible” components are all strongly affected by weather and climate, and although they can be contaminated quickly, they generally recover quickly too. By contrast, the subsurface processes of groundwater are much slower and longer lasting, ranging from years to millennia. However, with careful management, these different timescales can be used to create an integrated system of water supply that is robust in the face of drought.

The groundwater cycle in humid and arid regions differ fundamentally from each other. In humid climates, with high rainfall, large volumes of water seep into the groundwater, which contributes actively to the water cycle feeding streams, springs and wetlands during periods when the rainfall is lower. In semi-arid and arid climates, there is by contrast practically no exchange between the surface water and groundwater because the small volume of seepage from the occasional rainfall only rarely penetrates the thick and dry (unsaturated) soils. The groundwater is much deeper and isolated from surface contact. In these areas groundwater resources are only minimally recharged. Our understanding of the complete water cycle is only rudimentary.

Any attempt to accurately model the groundwater component of the water cycle requires adequate measurements and observations over decades. The computer models in common use in the United States only address the shallower groundwater and surface water interactions; GSFLOW (USGS) and ArcHydro (ESRI) are two commonly used models. This has not yet been done, instead rules of thumb and common knowledge assumptions are utilized instead of facts. Robert Bisson of Earth Water Global believes that there is much more water below the Earth’s surface than commonly believed and that the majority of the earth’s water passes beneath the measured surface and groundwater zones undetected.

We do know that groundwater availability varies by location. Precipitation and soil type determines how much the shallower groundwater is recharged annually. However the volume of water that can be stored is controlled by the reservoir characteristics of the subsurface rocks. Groundwater may be present today even in places with very dry climates because of the nature of the local geology and the historic climate cycles that have occurred through time. In the north-eastern Sahara, the Nubian Sandstone Aquifer System underlies an area of more than 750,000 square miles in Chad, Egypt, Libya and Sudan, and contains huge amounts of fresh groundwater. Giant groundwater deposits of comparable size and limited recharge are thought to exist on nearly all continents, but the amount of groundwater that can be pumped out is unknown. Water resources can be used sustainably only if their volume and variation through time are understood. However such information is often lacking, even in so-called developed regions. Hydrology as a science is very young and so little is known. Is it possible that water in these arid regions is finite and non-renewable because of changes in the earth’s climate over the millenia? According to Victor Ponce of San Diego State University, deep percolation represents 2% of the precipitation in California. He believes that the shallow groundwater belongs to surface waters. Any pumping of shallow water (especially for irrigation) effectively shortcuts the natural process, returning to the land surface groundwater that was going to return to the surface waters anyway.

Groundwater is usually cleaner than surface water. Groundwater is typically protected against contamination from the surface by the soils and rock layers covering the aquifer. This is the only available clean drinking water in many parts of the world. However, rising world population, changes in land use and rapid industrialization increasingly place groundwater in jeopardy. Once contaminated, groundwater is very difficult to clean and often after removal of contaminated plumes only long term abandonment of use to allow for natural attenuation is the only possible course of action. As droughts and water shortages appear the value of groundwater has begun to be more fully appreciated. Precious groundwater resources increasingly need to be protected and well managed to allow for sustainable long-term use.

The demand for water is rising as population, economic activity and agricultural irrigation grow. However, worldwide resources of accessible water are decreasing, due to overuse or pollution. The balance between demand (consumption) and supply (resource) is becoming unstable. More than 30 countries suffer from serious chronic water shortage, and groundwater is increasingly being used to cover the demand. According to UNESCO Water for People between 700 and 800 billion US tons of ground water are pumped each year. This is two hundred times the annual consumption of oil and coal used each year.

Water Rights, Water Use and Sustainable Life

The Felicity Barringer reported for the NY Times yesterday that due to the increasing drought in California farmers have been pumping more groundwater to irrigate their crops, lowering the level of the groundwater. As a result the state has begun to try and collect data on groundwater supplies with an eye to regulation. When the level of groundwater falls it is an indication that water use is unsustainable. California, my former home, is a semi-arid state rich with sun shine and a long growing season, but all crops need to be irrigated. There is a huge demand for water for farming and for people, and limited water resources to supply it. California seems to go through drought cycles, but the long term forecasts by the climate change model builders is that water resources available to the state will decrease as the Sierra snow pack decreases.

According to the US EPA: "Ground water is an important natural resource. More than 50 percent of the people in the United States, including almost everyone who lives in rural areas, use ground water for drinking and other household uses. Ground water is also used in some way by about 75 percent of cities and by many factories. The largest use of ground water is to irrigate crops. We can run out of ground water if more water is discharged than recharged. For example, during periods of dry weather, recharge to the aquifers decreases. If too much ground water is pumped during these times, the water table may fall and wells may go dry.” Wells going dry is what some Californians are worried about. Compliance with the request for water monitoring in California has been limited. Regulation of the water use, charging for private well pumping is something the farmers and rural residents fear.

Americans do not appreciate the true value of clean, potable, on demand water. We take for granted its unlimited availability and overlook the interconnected nature of our water supplies. There are those who think only in the short term, those who do not appreciate the experience of the past, and those who think the past is a perfect predictor of the future. Like 15% of all Americans my water is supplied from a well on my land. All my water comes from groundwater. One of the selection criteria for this house was the water and its quality. Many of the decisions I make on how I live are about protecting my water and the watershed and river in the woods behind my yard. Who owns the water and has rights to it is an interesting question. Ideally, all property owners would see themselves as the custodians of the land resources that they are. We need to think beyond carbon footprint, to understand that all the resources of the earth are limited in some way. Air and water are critical elements of life. Water rights are tied not only to the land but to life.