WATER WARS
RURAL NEVADA: SNWA NEEDS ATTITUDE CHANGE
BY LEWIS WHITTEN
About half a century ago, the ground below the Las Vegas Valley was so saturated that water literally sprung from the Earth. Interestingly, the site where Las Vegas Valley Water District now rests at Charleston and Valley View boulevards was the site of rare Artesian wells.
Today, years after exasperated groundwater pumping, all that remains is a dry dusty desert. Will this be the fate of Lincoln and White Pine counties?
A plan to tap underground water in rural Nevada north of Clark County for consumption in Las Vegas has turned into a political tidal wave. The Southern Nevada Water Authority’s Clark, Lincoln and White Pine Counties Groundwater Development Project has put Lincoln and White Pine counties on defense.
White Pine County Commissioner Gary Perea doesn’t like the plan.
“There cannot be enough water under White Pine and Lincoln counties to keep up with the growth of Las Vegas,” he said. “SNWA is gambling with my future, the future of my family and friends, and our ability to live in Snake and Spring valleys.”
There are many passionate critics like Perea in rural Nevada. Unfortunately for them, their voices don’t carry much weight with SNWA, which is represented by seven high-profile Clark County politicians.
SNWA Public Information Manager Vince Alberta points out that rural Nevada is represented on the Integrated Water Planning Advisory Committee. The SNWA Board of Directors established IWPAC in June 2004 to develop recommendations concerning the integration of in-state water resources into the water planning and management activities of Southern Nevada.
IWPAC consists of 29 members; Lincoln, White Pine and Nye counties have one representative each. The SNWA Board of Director consists of seven Clark County elected officials. Perhaps it’s time to create a seat for rural Nevada.
Consider an application for rural groundwater approved by Nevada State Engineer Hugh Ricci earlier this year. Ricci decided the SNWA Board was too thirsty and cut their request in half. A rural voice on the SNWA Board could curb that powerful thirst.
The writing has been on the wall for more than 16 years now, when the Las Vegas Valley Water District filed applications with the state engineer to claim all unallocated groundwater in Nye, Lincoln and White Pine counties. Now, due to Ricci’s ruling, Lincoln County groundwater could drip from Clark County faucets as soon as 2007.
Next SNWA wants a pipeline built to draw groundwater from as far north as Ely. That project is more complicated because of newfound opposition from several environmental groups, ranchers, farmers, legislators and educators. CCSN instructor Mark Bird has been trying for years to change SNWA’s attitude about groundwater.
“SNWA is working on plans to construct about 900 miles of pipelines that would take about 10 years to complete. The total cost of these pipelines could range from $5 billion to $15 billion,” Bird said. “Clearly this project merits far greater scrutiny by politicians, the media and the general public.”
Bird points out 14 alternatives to the pipeline plan, but emphasizes three key water options for Las Vegas. First he suggests the socialist approach: Slowing Clark County’s 5 percent annual growth rate to 2 percent. He also recommends better urban water conservation and a more aggressive approach towards taking water away from other users along the Colorado River. Essentially the third option alone could solve all of Clark County’s water problems.
The Law of the River was set in stone long before The Flamingo Hotel broke ground. That law gives Arizona 2.8 million acre feet (maf) annually, California 4.4 maf and Nevada a mere 0.3 maf. The Mexican Water Treaty of 1944 committed 1.5 maf of the Colorado River’s annual flow to Mexico. Even a small increase in Nevada’s allotment would make a huge difference.
So why not just take more water from Lake Mead? According to Alberta that’s just not feasible. “That would take an act of Congress and state legislators from every state affected would have to pass legislation.”
IWPAC members suggest the water situation at Lake Mead is unpredictable and unavailable.
Completion of the groundwater project seems inevitable mainly because the project has been in the works for so long and many politically powerful people have a vested monetary interest in it. The only debate seems to be how much water to pump and when and where to start pumping.
Alberta expects SNWA and Ricci, who has final say over the entire project, to be cautious.
“They’ll pump small amounts over a two or three year period,” Alberta said. “If there is a negative impact Ricci will tell the applicant to stop.”
The concern in rural Nevada is what public officials will define as a negative impact. Mark Twain reminds us, “Whisky is for drinking. Water is for fighting over.” And in the world of politics a project is often only bad if it will keep a politician from being reelected.
Unfortunately for the folks in rural Nevada, they don’t have political clout in Clark County.
Still in the end Nevada State Engineer Hugh Ricci will have the final say over the project. Now, however, SNWA has juiced up their project by putting two former Nevada State Engineers on payroll, which has critics questioning whether that juice will cause rural Nevada to dry up when Ricci makes future decisions.
One important concern comes from Jerald Anderson, a Utah farmer, who points out that technical information is all coming from SNWA staffers. Their advisors could just be telling the agency what they want to hear. Anderson would like committee members to hear independent perspectives on the issue. At the very least rural Nevada should be represented on the SNWA Board of Directors.
