New Mexico’s water math isn’t adding up. Real water plus paper water are supposed to equal water supply, but it doesn’t, especially during drought.

Real water: That’s wet water, the stuff one needs for drinking, washing clothes, growing food, building houses and cooling power plants.

Paper water: The piece of paper that says how much real water someone has the legal right to use.

The problem: New Mexico has more paper water than real water.

The result: Someone is going to go thirsty.

This has to be taken into consideration when entities are divvying up water. This might also be of particular concern for residents in southwest New Mexico in regard to the Arizona Water Settlements Act.

Severe dryness across California and Arizona has spread into other Western states. On the Colorado River, the water supply for 30 million people in seven states and Mexico, the Lake Powell and Lake Mead reservoirs are only half-full and unlikely to recover for years. In Los Angeles County, on track for a record dry year with 21% of normal rain downtown since last summer, fire officials are threatening to cancel Fourth of July fireworks if conditions worsen. On Wednesday, Los Angeles Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa urged residents to voluntarily cut water use 10%, the city’s first such call since the 1990s.

What does that have to do with Arizona, or, for that matter, New Mexico? According to the Arizona Republic:

After a long decline punctuated by mine closures and layoffs, Arizona’s copper industry is making an unprecedented comeback.

Soaring metals prices have companies scrambling to open mines and expand existing ones to take advantage of the boom.

But mines consume huge amounts of water and could put tremendous pressure on the state’s limited water supply.

Water regulators, county planners and environmentalists are increasingly worried about the effect on aquifers, already suffering from decades of overpumping.

At least seven new mining projects are being planned around the state, and that doesn’t count the ongoing expansion of existing mines. The new projects will require 40,000 acre-feet of water annually. That’s enough to support a city larger than Tempe.

That’s enough water for 200,000 people each year, and, in an area already plagued by water shortages, will be a tough pill to swallow.

But, we still haven’t answered the question of New Mexico’s involvement. Well, the answer is simple, really: the Gila River.

If you recall, at the end of the last legislative session Gov. Bill Richardson line-item-vetoed a provision to fund a study of the Gila and San Francisco rivers. The study was tied to the Arizona Water Settlements Act, which provides New Mexico with 14,000 acre-feet of water per year from the Gila River. Right now, that water goes to Arizona.

At Silver City’s Town Council meeting on Tuesday, Mayor James Marshall reiterated a desire to see the studies move forward.

“The only way to protect that river is to study it and argue with facts that are grounded in science,” Marshall said.

He also told the council that the Interstate Stream Commission is still working to develop support for the studies, and that the Sandia Modeling team is also making additional progress on that front.

14,000 acre-feet of water is 1/3 of what the seven Arizona mines will be using, and I imagine Arizonans would be happy to keep getting that water. That threat has always been present, but the thought that Arizona cities will now be 40,000 acre-feet drier than before makes the threat that much more real.

Bonus: check out this Alibi story on Albuquerque’s shift away from aquifer water for drinking and other household use to San Juan/Chama River water. The story is especially interesting in the context of last year’s news that the Mangas aquifer, which supplies the drinking water for much of Grant County, has a huge amount of water in it, and is continuously replenished by the Gila River. Turns out people used to say the same thing about Albuquerque’s aquifer:

This boundless body of water was going to support our city for generations to come. And it would be another decade before the dream was proven false.

The catalyst for our shift in understanding came in 1992 with a study published by hydrologists J.W. Hawley and C.S. Haase entitled A Hydrological Framework of the Northern Albuquerque Basin . The study showed that the reservoir beneath Albuquerque was not, after all, one giant pod filled with water, but a fractured network of water-filled vessels, some easier to reach than others, some with impure water.

Additionally, prior to the study the Rio Grande and the aquifer were thought to be directly linked. The city purchased San Juan-Chama water in 1963 with the intention of using the river water as an offset to Albuquerque’s groundwater pumping. The San Juan-Chama water was diverted to the Rio Grande, and the theory went that the extra water from the river would seep back into the aquifer, replenishing much of what the city pumped out every year. The Hawley and Haase study, however, showed the aquifer-river connection was somewhat weak. Although the river still replenished the aquifer, it did so at a much slower rate than previously thought.

Global warming is turning the Southwest into a permanent Dust Bowl, where the dry conditions of our worst 20th century droughts — the 1930s and 1950s — become the norm over the next century, according to new research.

Global warming will push our winter storm track, which brings the region much of its moisture, to the north, according to Richard Seager at Columbia University’s Lamont Doherty Earth Observatory.

Seager’s results, published on line today by the journal Science, sent ripples through the western water community as they began circulating this week.

They suggest a fundamentally new kind of drought here — not the occasional unusually dry stretches of the type the region saw in the 1930s and 1950s, but a climate that is that dry all the time.

John also has more at his blog:

It’s reasonable to think that most of the folks in sub-Saharan Africa didn’t celebrate the release of the latest grim Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change report by heading out to the ballpark last night. But that’s what Lissa and I did, the beneficiary of a pair of free tickets to see our Isotopes play Omaha out at the lab.

Given the stark headlines in the morning paper – Global Warming Heralds Slow Impending Doom, or words to that effect – it was fitting that L suggested extra layers, and brought a blanket. It was 44 degrees at game time, with a howling east wind blowing in from right that kept more than a few fly balls in the ballpark and more than a few fans up in the clubhouse drinking their beers rather than in their seats watching baseball.

“We need to get on a sustainable footing as a society and not expect more out of the river than it’s able to deliver,” Harris, a raft guide in Pilar who also runs the nonprofit Rio Grande Restoration, says.

But if the state’s cities and suburbs continue to grow without restraint–demanding all the more water each year–the state is in for trouble, Harris and others believe. Long-term effects will include economic hardship for the state, a lowered quality of life for residents, reduced biological diversity and, without irrigable land left along the rivers, a lack of food security. “We have to confront this,” Harris says, “because no matter what anyone thinks, by deferring a decision, you’re making a decision.”

The clock is definitely ticking.

There’s more over at the Christian Science Monitor:

According to the latest scientific evidence, such dry spells are likely to grow more severe –A as they will around the world. Global warming, climate scientists say, is changing climates from the Himalayan Mountains to the Euphrates-Tigris River Basin. Patterns of rain and snowfall are shifting significantly.

The question now becomes: How will nations and individuals adapt as Earth’s climate warms? Glaciers from the Andes to the Alps are shrinking at an accelerating pace. Countries are already haggling over river rights. From 400 million to as many as 3.2 billion people face serious water shortages over the next 20 to 50 years. New Mexico, an already dry region that is getting drier, is on the front lines.

Mr. Armijo, a snow surveyor for the US Department of Agriculture, knows something is going on. Like much of the American West, the state has been in the grip of drought for years.

“We’ve set record lows for snowpack a couple of times in the last five or six years,” he says. “For the most part, the snowpack’s gone. In the last three to four weeks, we’ve experienced some really warm temperatures.”

The NY Times also hit on the issue yesterday:

The scramble for water is driven by the realities of population growth, political pressure and the hard truth that the Colorado River, a 1,400-mile-long silver thread of snowmelt and a lifeline for more than 20 million people in seven states, is providing much less water than it had.

According to some long-term projections, the mountain snows that feed the Colorado River will melt faster and evaporate in greater amounts with rising global temperatures, providing stress to the waterway even without drought. This year, the spring runoff is expected to be about half its long-term average. In only one year of the last seven, 2005, has the runoff been above average.

Everywhere in the West, along the Colorado and other rivers, as officials search for water to fill current and future needs, tempers are flaring among competing water users, old rivalries are hardening and some states are waging legal fights.

Conventional wisdom is solidifying: we’re going to face continued hardships in meeting our water needs in the future, especially as the effects of global warming increase. That makes fights over, say, the Gila River, that much more important.

Hat tip to Headwaters News for the links.

This is a tangled web of stories and interests.

Silver City Mayor James Marshall on Tuesday alleged that his community was shortchanged on captial outlay funding so that the study could be completed. He also said a Richardson staffer is the one who told him that Silver City was essentially funding the study with its share of capital outlay money. I’m waiting for a call from the governor’s office to confirm the comment.

If you go back to the beginning of the session, you’ll see Lt. Gov. Diane Denish talking (PDF) about the importance of conservation along the Gila, but also saying that the AWSA would have to be implemented in an environmentally conscious way. That won’t happen unless the studies are completed to determine the river’s ecology.

Finally, you have Bill Hume, Richardson’s advisor penning a letter to the editor (which will appear in tomorrow’s Silver City Daily Press) explaining why the study is needed: to conduct environmental research (click here for more information).

I don’t know whether a diversion project is a good idea; that’s what the study is supposed to determine. With deadlines built into the AWSA, we may never know.

Richardson’s action today might only serve the interests of Arizona.

[N]othing in the NRC report sounded terribly new. We knew that droughts much worse than what we’ve experienced in the last 100 years have occurred in the past, we knew that the river is over-appropriated, and we basically knew that global warming could make drought even worse.

Fleck responds by arguing that reporters should have no qualms about reporting information that may not be new, but still valuable to readers:

My conversations with the lay public and my observations of the political debates over water in New Mexico lead me to believe lots of folks don’t understand that 80 percent of the consumptively used water in the arid West is used by agriculture. A refined understanding of drought probabilities or the potential water supply effects of global warming is playing at the margins relative to the ag-urban issue.

Check out John’s first post on the water study (where you can download your own copy) and then head over to this link for more.

There’s quite a bit going on here. On one side, you have the Gila Conservation Coalition and Rep. Mimi Stewart, arguing that the $66 million tied to the Arizona Water Settlements Act can (and should) be evenly divided among the four counties in southwest New Mexico. The purpose: let each county invest the money (about $16.5 million per county), and then use the interest to pay for water projects.

On the other side is the Interstate Stream Commission, which was tasked by Congress to approve expenditures of the AWSA money (and which many feel is likely to support a diversion project). The ISC told me that House Bill 42 might not be legal, because it would supersede federal legislation. The ISC is backed up by a legislative analysis of the bill conducted by the Legislative Finance Council (see PDF here).

There were a few items that didn’t make it into my article, which I did want to mention.

Danielle Vick, Gila Program Manager for the ISC, said one of her concerns was any future development of the river. While she said a split of the initial $66 million would prohibit the state from diverting water along the Gila, there is nothing preventing a private firm from raising the funds to do so.

In addition, Vick said the scientific study being completed by the ISC would lend insight into the Gila River Basin and the river’s hydrology. She told me that nobody could describe the possible effects of residents or commercial users drilling 500 wells on private property near the river, which is one reason to continue the studies (which could be halted if House Bill 42 is adopted).

The fate of 14,000 acre-feet of water from the Gila and the San Francisco rivers is one of those issues tha’s going to be around for a while. It’s complex, and there are a lot of good ideas and strong opinions on both sides.

This bill is a reflection of that.

P.S. While we’re talking about water, I should end you over to John Fleck’s place. John has blogged several times this winter about the impact of storms on our region’s overall water situation. From one of his latest:

You can see that on the Western Regional Climate Center map above – all those bits of orange and yellow and even red across the southwest. You’ve got to get all the way over to central Colorado and New Mexico before you begin to see normal to above-normal precipitation. Those are the places most of us live – Denver and the east slope communities in Colorado, Albuquerque in New Mexico – but those are places that only contribute modestly to the region’s water supplies.

Understanding the Present, Planning for the Future

January 11-14, 2007

Silco Theater 311 N. Bullard St. Silver City, NM
Free Admission (Speakers on large screen DVD)

Peak Oil is the point in time when world oil production begins to decline – FOREVER.

Each session features a large-screen presentation of the speaker, with the exception of local speakers.

CONFERENCE DETAILS
The conference begins on Thursday, January 11th, 2007 and runs through Sunday, January 14th, 2007.

Each session features a large screen DVD presentation by well-known speakers on Peak Oil. All presentations are free and open to the public. All sessions will be held at the Silco Theater, 311 N. Bullard St., Silver City, NM. Please use alternative transportation when possible – car pool, bike, bus, or walk. Lunch is on your own. Water and tea will be provided, but please bring your own cup.

For further information call William Joseph at 505-538-5892.

Full conference schedule after the jump.

CONFERENCE SCHEDULE

A special pre-conference presentation by Glenn Landers of the Southwest Environmental Center will be held on Thursday, January 11, 2007 from 7:00 p.m.-9:00 p.m. at the Silco Theater.

Glenn will present the award-winning documentary, “A Land Out of Time”.
This film documents the attempts by gas industries to open up sensitive ecological areas to oil and gas drilling and the ensuing public backlash.

After the documentary, Glenn will give a presentation on Otera Mesa, which is currently under assault.
Facilitated by John Fridinger, Gila Sustainability Network

Friday, January 12, 2007
7:00 p.m.-9:00 p.m. David Orr “Peak Oil, Climate Change and Our Future” David Orr, a pioneer in environmental literacy and ecological design, author of Earth in Mind and Chair of Environmental Studies at Oberlin College will explore the twin challenges of Peak Oil and climate change.
Facilitated by William Joseph, Grant County Peace Coalition

Saturday, January 13, 2007
10:00 a.m.-11:30 a.m. Richard Heinberg “Peak Oil, A Proactive Response” Richard Heinberg, a leading educator and international speaker and author of The Oil Depletion Protocol and Powerdown will explain the immense challenge of global peak oil production and its economic impacts.

Facilitated by Tom Gibbons, Biodiesel Group

11:30 a.m.-1:00 p.m. Lunch On Your Own

1:00 p.m.-2:30 p.m. Julian Darley “Relocalize Now”
Julian Darley, author of High Noon for Natural Gas, director of the Post Carbon Institute, and coauthor of the forthcoming Relocalize Now! will address global relocalization and how communities can begin to prepare for Peak Oil.
Facilitated by Allyson Siwik, GRIP

3:00 p.m.-4:30 p.m. Mark & Rachel Bighley “Energy Efficient Housing.” This informative presentation by local home builders, Mark & Rachel Bighley of Mark Bighley Construction, will offer practical applications for implementing energy efficiency in both new and existing homes.

Sunday, January 14, 2007
1:00 p.m.-2:30 p.m. Vicki Robins “Voluntary Simplicity as a Way of Life” Vicki Robins, co-author of Your Money or Your Life and president of the New Road Map Foundation will introduce voluntary simplicity as a viable solution for Peak Oil and climate change as well as a way to lead a more healthy, fulfilling life.

Facilitated by Susan Van Auken, Advocate for Simple Living
3:00 p.m.-4:30 p.m. Paul Hawken “Sustainability as an Infinite Game” Paul Hawken, author of Natural Capitalism and an activist on sustainability and environmentalism, will present a global vision on how we can incorporate sustainable actions in our lives.
Facilitated by Shirley Pevarnik, MLA in Creation Spirituality

Following each presentation there will be an open forum. During these forums, participants will have an opportunity to discuss changes they can make and to create their own Personal Action Plan.

Domenici’s reps met with Silver City Mayor James Marshall, among others, as part of a fact-finding mission to look at the planning group’s progress.

“They wanted to know what was really important to us, with the project,” Marshall said. “My reply was, basically, we need to ensure they get the proper funding to make sure all the planning and studies get completed.”

Marshall said on Tuesday that Silver City had not signed a Joint Powers Agreement that would formalize the Planning Group. The JPA would establish a fiscal infrastructure for the group. Marshall told me this morning the town had not signed the JPA because the planning and studies related to the settlement are not yet complete.

Meanwhile, Silver City became the last government entity in Grant County to sign a JPA creating a countywide water commission this week. Catron County has already made a similar move, so it looks as though the counties are getting set for a turf war regarding the 14,000 acre-feet from the Gila.

Meanwhile, residents in Arizona are wondering what’s going to happen to the Gila if New Mexico holds back that water:

But the effects seem most visible on the Gila, if only because when industry tamed the other rivers, the Gila suffered, too. And the demands on the Gila itself, especially on its upper reaches, have not lessened and will likely grow as New Mexico studies a plan to build its first dam on the river.

Efforts to save the Gila are as patchy as the river itself, which is dying along its lower reaches. Work started nearly a decade ago to restore lengths in urban Maricopa County, but those projects will cost hundreds of millions of dollars and require a permanent commitment of money and water.

There is no overall vision or riverwide rescue plan, and it’s unlikely such a plan could address every threat in time. It’s as if Arizonans stopped thinking of the Gila as a complete river and see it instead as an industrial waterway – if they see it at all.

So is the drought over?

That was probably the most-asked question in New Mexico last week, as long-awaited rains hit the state with so much force that floodwaters damaged neighborhoods from Rio Rancho and Belen to Silver City and Sunland Park.

If your living room was flooded with muddy water, the answer to the drought question must have looked pretty obvious: what drought?

But to 50 of the nation’s top drought scientists meeting at a Santa Fe hotel last week, the answer appeared as blurred as the view out the rain-streaked hotel windows.

As an aside, I just want to mention the great use of imagery there — great writing John. Back to the story:

What has happened in New Mexico over the last month illustrates why drought questions are never simple.

If you look at the state’s greening hillsides, you’d think our drought had ended. But Elephant Butte Reservoir, the state’s largest, is still at just 10 percent of capacity, left dry by years of shortfalls that cannot be ameliorated by a single rainy month.

(italics mine)

Read the whole thing to get a take on what’s happening with water here in the Land of Enchantment.