An attorney for the Arizona Department of Water Resources said he is optimistic that litigation involving hundreds of parties in Arizona and New Mexico will be resolved within one year.

ADWR deputy counsel Gregg Houtz said he became more optimistic about a potential settlement in the last two weeks for the case commonly referred to as the Globe-Equity-59 case. He described any solution process as "embryonic," but attributed the new hope to changes in the San Carlos Irrigation and Drainage District's approach to a potential settlement.

The litigation is between the Gila Valley Irrigation District and the San Carlos Apache Irrigation and Drainage District, he said, but includes hundreds of parties who fall under both titles. The parties stretch from Kearny to Virden, N.M., he said. Both sides of the litigation have come to more agreeable numbers dictating how much water each party would be allocated, he said. The amounts of water are also compliant with the amounts dictated by Sen. John Kyl's (R-Ariz.) guidelines.

In February of 2002, Kyl introduced a new version of the Arizona Water Settlements Act to Congress that included a potential new section called Title IV. If a settlement were to be reached between the groups, the settlement would be added under Title IV to be approved by the federal government.

Houtz said the legislation could hit the Senate floor as early as April, although he warned that a lot of obstacles still need to be overcome.

The stakeholders who attended the meeting were shocked at Houtz's news and asked Houtz to repeat himself, which he did. They agreed that the news was the most optimistic news they have heard in a long time.

The attendees included ADWR statewide water resources planning manager Thomas Whitmer, Bill Allred of the Gila Valley Irrigation District, John Bryce, the Pima Town Manager, Jan Holder, the Gila Watershed Partnership Program Manager, Robert Porter, the Safford Director of Public Works, David Newlin, Duncan Town Manager, Grant Howard, a former Phelps Dodge employee and water expert, Lynne Fisher of the Arizona Bureau of Reclamation, Johnny Cockman of the Bureau of Land Management and Mike Holleram of the Arizona Game and Fish Department.

Hope for the water plan

Holder said the most promising news to come out of the meeting was the variety of stakeholders who attended in support of the partnership.

Local rancher Pete Brawley also said recent events have shown hope for the future.

"I really, definitely think that we have an opportunity to get the input of the local people," he said.

She is confident that a water plan can be devised to protect the water interests from larger entities such as Tucson, Phoenix and Prescott.

"We can't expect to grow as a community and expect that our needs will be met," she said.

If Graham and Greenlee counties do not develop a water plan, the ADWR will do it for them, Holder said.

Houtz said the time is right for rural folks to develop a water plan.

"The rural folks have been kind of ignored," he said. "I think we've entered into another era of statewide planning. The rural folks have a chance to be in the forefront."

Houtz cited recent allocations to Prescott and Payson as examples of rural areas securing their water rights. He said the political climate across the state is changing to allow rural watersheds to protect their rights.

Large landowners often are hesitant to come to any negotiating table with fears of allowing potential litigation enemies to find out how much water they have, Houtz said in response to a question by Howard. Howard identified a high level of mistrust between the groups who are engaged in litigation.

"There is a lot of mistrust in this valley," Houtz said.

Howard said the worst part about litigation is that it often doesn't accomplish much except for high lawyers fees.

The attendees seemed to agree that the lawyers are sometimes unable to be paid because the parties are broke from the fighting in the courts. Allred said that his group pays large legal fees because they have to in order to protect their water rights.

The plan itself

Graham County Supervisor and Gila Watershed Partnership Chairman Drew John has said in past interviews with the Courier that the plan is intended to safeguard water quality, conserve water and to save it for the future.

During the meeting, Whitmer answered the group's questions about what the water plan is to include and how in-depth it will be.

He said several times that the group must account for every different water user's goal, such as the agriculture industry. Whitmer suggested that the group figure out how much water local farmers expect to use and want to use in 2013, 2023, 2033 and even farther into the future.

He said some other water users to study were domestic, municipal and industrial users.

Comparisons to the San Pedro Partnership were frequently made by Whitmer, who said the group has been mandated to meet their watershed's demands until 2050. At first, the San Pedro Partnership had problems with stakeholders coming to the negotiating table, he said. Once all the stakeholders realized the only way to protect their future water supply was to work together, they began to work together and became one of the most effective watershed groups in the state.

Once the future needs of agricultural, municipal, industrial and domestic users were realized, the San Pedro Partnership came up with solutions to help satisfy each group's needs, he said.

By using inventive conservation techniques, the partnership managed to guarantee that it will have enough water to support the military base located in Sierra Vista, Whitmer said. By doing so, the partnership helped secure the base's survival, which is integral to many economies throughout the state.

"If they don't meet the goals of reauthorization, the base may go out the door," he said.

Some of the inventive techniques used by the San Pedro Partnership included retiring agricultural land, updating their agreements with the Central Arizona Project canal, and treating water from mines to offset pumping from wells used by farmers.

The Gila Watershed Partnership has also come up with inventive solutions by studying salt cedar removal projects and by applying for money to desalinate salty wells, Holder said.

Porter asked whether the group should devise a plan with a settlement with the San Carlos Apache Irrigation District in mind, or not.

Whitmer replied that the group should do both in order to be prepared for the future.

When asked what political links the San Pedro Partnership has, Whitmer responded, "It's an ad-hoc group. It's just this group that came together."

Often the groups will have researchers assigned by supervisors in the relevant counties, he said.

Fisher said one of the hardest parts of designing a water plan is the data collection. Once the data is collected and the plan has been saved into a computer, constantly changing data can easily be plugged into the plan to keep it updated.