May
1
A National Water Vision for the US?
May 1, 2008 | Posted by Jerry Sehlke
Dick Engberg posted a very interesting concept to the AWRA board/staff and technical committee listserv’s today that may be of interest to our members related to the potential of developing a National Water Policy or Strategy (see below). There has been quite a healthy discussion that has been going on about it most of the day. I am hoping that those that responded to Dick’s posting will be willing to capture their thoughts from that discussion and bring them over to the blog to share those thoughts with our membership.
My personal thoughts are that it is pretty amazing (but not in a good way) that the US doesn’t have a National Vision for what is arguably the most/one of the most important natural resources on earth. The vision doesn’t need to get to long, complex or contentious - the goal of developing a vision is to state the ideal of what you would like to accomplish; e.g., we want to make water available and to utilize it for the benefit of all man kind, yet not pollute it or overuse it to the deteriment of the environment. I’m not saying that is what the vision should be, I just saying that it doesn’t need to be difficult or contentious to develop. Of couse, the potentially difficult and contentious aspects come soon thereafter, if we decide that we should develop water resources strategies, goals and/or policies on how to implement such a vision. As always the devil is in the details and the details are in the strategies, goals and policies.
So, what are your thoughts? Do you think that the US needs/should develop a National Water Vision? Should AWRA help lead the way? If so, should we develop an AWRA Vision and then share it with others or should we invite our sister professional water resources organizations to co-develop one? Let us know what you think!
Subject: [Impacteditors] RE: [AWRA Staff] Rivers Running Dry
This is interesting. I’m glad to see others getting on the band wagon. Too late? Who knows? To have a coherent and cogent policy we need a National Water Vision. We don’t have a national vision, we have a variety of visions each based on the needs of the person or group’s specific concerns or needs. What is necessary is some way of coalescing these visions into a single one. Policy will come out of this. I find it interesting that there is now in Canada a CWRA (Canadian Water Resources Association) working group that is mapping out and energizing the processes needed to develop and implement a “National Water Strategy” for Canada. It’s interesting that the Canadians can get a group like this together and deal with this need. The CWRA Board of Directors recognized that a National Strategy must be developed and implemented with active participation from all levels of government, all business sectors and citizen groups. I like their use of the word “Strategy” - it ha!
As, for me, a more positive connotation than “Policy”.
We attempted to do something like what the Canadians are doing with the Water Policy Dialogue series and our “After Action” reports. I believe what the Canadians are doing, though, is one step further, that is, taking the equivalent of the after action reports together with imput from government and citizens and building a strategy.
I’m wondering if AWRA should take the bull by the horns and put together a working group to do the same thing as the Canadians? Who would we invite to be part of such a group? Would it be relevant? Would anyone listen? Would anyone care? I think there are a lot of us that care - it might be a way for our voices to be heard. Perhaps the meeting that Gerry Galloway has proposed for September should be constructed along these lines?
Some random thoughts.
Dick Engberg
Comments
2 Comments so far
Subscribe
I like the word “strategy”. When I mention “policy” in my talks in Oregon about the state’s water issues, some people immediately seem to think “plan”, which scares/angers them (“You’re going to take my water!”).
We should take up the cudgels like our Canadian colleagues. Such an effort would be relevant. Would the right people listen? I don’t know, but our Dialogues have certainly had an impact.
Why not try to get Rep. Linder and the House Water Caucus on board? Let’s also seek support from the Senate side (e.g., Jeff Bingaman [D-NM])? We could ask some of their staffers (e.g., Mike Connor from the Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources or Valerie West from Sen. Gordon Smith’s [R-OR] office) to serve on the “strategy group”. This might help ensure that “someone listens”.
Here is an idea for one aspect of a “vision” for a national water policy.
Create a nationwide aquaduct system capable of balancing our demand for water! (Even the Romans had this one figured out). The system could take excess water from areas such as the midwest where it is flooding and pump/transport the water to areas where their are droughts like california, and southeastern USA. Not only would this help balance and protect our water supplies, a project of this scope would be like the original building of the federal highway interstate system.
What do you think?