Someone needs to take the lead to protect our water future

As pointed out in an Aug. 23 editorial in The Arizona Republic, our water future for for a year or two has been assured through efforts to keep the level of Lake Mead above a pre-established threshold level. Beyond that, we should generally be good for the next three to five years as a result of the excellent water-management programs we have implemented in recent years plus new efforts that are likely to involve additional effort.

But who is looking out for our longer-term water future beyond the next five years or so? This rapidly approaching future is likely to require much more ambitious endeavors to preserve the lifestyle to which we have become accustomed.

The short-term view

As pointed out in the editorial, in the short run, things don’t look too bad. We dodged a bullet again this year by implementing a number of short-term measures to ensure the water level of Lake Mead is maintained above the level that would trigger mandatory diversion reductions — which will hit Arizona agriculture particularly hard. Although next year looks more “iffy,” we should be able to tough it out for the next few years through a combination of drawing down our water-banked reserves, negotiating cuts with water users and further conservation efforts.

But let’s be realistic, folks. None of these measures is likely to prepare us adequately for the not-so-distant future when, according to Maricopa Association of Governments projections, we are going to need to find a way to accommodate another 700,000 new arrivals to the West Valley. And this does not even consider growth in other parts of the Valley nor the inevitable growth in the other states in the Lower Colorado River Basin (California and Nevada).

The longer-term view

To accommodate this growth during our lifetime, we are going to need an augmented supply of water. The WESTCAPS Lower Colorado River Basin study currently underway will suggest what form and shape this solution might best take, though this study is still a couple of years from completion. But already, the individual water-management plans of cities like Surprise are raising this specter. And most observers considering this looming situation are suggesting that, whatever solution is presented, it’s likely to be large and costly, requiring the participation of multiple entities if it's to be successfully implemented.

So how prepared are we in the West Valley to deal with this eventuality? The simple answer is that we are still at square one — i.e., we really do not have even a glimmer of an institutional framework that could be leveraged in this regard. Rather, the West Valley is characterized by a balkanized landscape that has almost zero history of working together on solutions to regional problems. To put this in perspective, in dealing with this same issue, San Diego County spent $1 billion and needed 10 years to produce its first drop of additional water — and it already had an institutional framework in place.

Lessons from Israel

To give you an idea of what we are going to need, let’s take a look at how Israel has dealt with this issue. Israel is very similar to the Valley when it comes to water. Both have several million inhabitants, both are in a desert climate, and both are virtual islands from a water-management perspective. That is, both have absolute limits regarding the amount of water available, which can be stretched only so far by approaches such as conservation and recycling.

Against this backdrop, here are the basics of Israel's water-management regime:

• Water has been classified as a national resource not subject to private ownership.
• Water management is based on nationwide regional planning with a single, national water utility.
• Water planning is long-term (30 years or more).
• Water is distributed to various users at full cost.
• Water management has become a means of unifying the country, not dividing it.
• And water management is handled by technocrats, not politicians.

Does any of this sound familiar in the West Valley? If not, then who is going to lead the charge in areas like this to get us better positioned to address our challenging water future?

For further reading, I recommend: "Let There Be Water," by Seth Siegel (St. Martin’s Press, 2015).

Jeff Gibbs is a former Litchfield Park planning commissioner who now lives in Surprise. Reach him at jeffgibbs44@gmail.com.