Introduction to Arizona Water Management and Legal Issues - Nick Melcher

The management of water resources has a long history due to several conflicts. According to change in water uses and increasing water demand, several acts were adopted and revised to adapt to the challenges.  In the USA each state has authority for water rights. It was mentioned that in the past, when water use permits were given, it was not taken into consideration, the low river flow conditions or that the river could at times even become dry.  There are different riparian rights in different parts of the USA.  If there is water conflict between two water users who live in different states, it goes to the federal courts for resolution.  The law has been based on “first in time and first in right.”  The users that have water rights from this law, have the rights recognized until now.  Related to appropriate water rights as property, there is no individual ownership of flowing water and state constitutional  and statutory provisions—water is public and therefore each state has broad rights to regulate.

As the Colorado goes to Mexico, treaties have been signed to guide its management.  The Colorado Basin has a difficult management due to the respective surface and groundwater legal frameworks that have been developed in different timescales. As  a result, it is hard to match the legal terms with physical management groundwater and surface water.  Another interesting point is that Colorado river law only applies, in the lower basin, to the main river and not its tributaries.  While in the upper basin laws apply to tributaries as well.

In Arizona, there is then the dual system i.e. for surface water ( prior appropriate doctrine- first in time, first in right) and groundwater (ability to pump, so long as the use is beneficial and reasonable.) The groundwater management act of Arizona establishes that “ it is necessary to conserve, protect and allocate the use of groundwater resources of the state and to provide a framework for the comprehensive management oand regulation of withdrawals, transportation use, conservation and conveyance of rights to use groundwater in this state.”  The goal is to have “safe yield”  i.e. a long term balance between the annual amount of groundwater withdrawn and the amount of natural and artificial recharge.

This presentation describes well the type of conflicts between:
1) States in the same country,
2) two nations (USA and Mexico).

The Colorado river management between the states of Arizona and California is a good example of federal arbitration.
Regarding to further conflicts and to avoid it due to increasing water demand, climatic change and water quality degradation, and to enhance regional cooperation, a huge and relevant challenge is to adapt and harmonize the legal and institutional aspects.

Lesson Learned: The different legal timetable and framework, area scales and the timing of water management in relation to groundwater and surface water respectively, has brought strong difficulties in trying to integrate groundwater and surface water management.

Blog reporters: Djamel Latrech, Abdel Kader Dodo and Julio Kettelhut