GROUNDED IN HIGH-QUALITY DATA OR BANKING ON A FANTASY? A HYDROLOGIC ASSESSMENT OF ARIZONA'S GROUNDWATER LEGISLATION

Since pumping technology became more available in the last century, groundwater has been used to provide water to growing populations. Many places, including the state of Arizona, soon realized that they were depleting this resource at an alarming rate with severe consequences, e.g. land subsidence and loss of the aquifer's overall storage capacity by compaction, diminished water quality, and increased pumping costs. After previous legislative efforts to regulate groundwater failed, the State of Arizona passed the Groundwater Management Act (GMA) in 1980 in an attempt to remedy groundwater depletion and in order to secure Arizona's supply of Colorado River water from the U.S. government.

Although many water managers and policy makers in Arizona view the GMA as progressive and successful, it has some significant shortcomings from a scientific standpoint. First, the GMA does not manage groundwater and surface water together, even though they are hydrologically connected. Second, it inadvertently created a situation that makes parts of Arizona more vulnerable to climate change. And third, the goal of safe yield, a goal in many of the Active Management Areas (AMAs), is flawed in both its logic and its implementation as a management goal.

Because the scientific underpinnings of the GMA are faulty and cannot accomplish the objectives of the GMA on their own, those involved in water issues in Arizona generally are reliant on other policy-based mechanisms to manage water, which may potentially include risk-spreading strategies that increase the number of stakeholders involved in making water decisions. Additionally, study participants who I interviewed commonly cited that water was not the tightest constraint on growth in all areas of the state, especially the Phoenix metropolitan area.