Opinion
Editorial: Short Memories Compel Rules

Editorial: Enforcement of Registry a Relief

Letters to the Editor

Editorial: It's Too Soon To Shut Prisons

Editorial: Let's Put Double Standard To Rest

Guest View: Throwing Money Into Wind Power

Letters to the Editor

Editorial: Hot Line FYIs Need Tweaking

Editorial: Better Protection for Pecos Canyon

Guest View: Myths About Farm Bill Dispelled

More
Opinion

HOME	CLASSIFIEDS	OBITUARIES	SPORTS	OPINION

Thursday, January 13, 2005

We Must Protect Basin Water

By Shellie Langley

    Guest View
    I was one of about 150 residents at the emergency meeting of the Estancia Basin Water Planning Committee on Jan. 6. I was happy to see all three of our Torrance County commissioners in attendance, along with representatives from three newspapers, Heather Wilson's office and a senator's office. It was interesting to see that there was no one there to represent Sierra Waterworks.
    From your Jan. 5 article, "Santa Fe Thirsts For Valley Water," John Cyle Sharp made it sound like he was going to do this valley a huge favor when he stated, "The truth is, this is not a new allocation, and it's not brackish water." By redirecting agricultural water to urban uses, "we're going to pump 48 percent less water." He also said "the deal" would actually reduce ground-water pumping in the Estancia Basin. If this is the case and Cyle Sharp is such a hero, why wasn't he at this meeting?
    There were many questions that couldn't be answered at this meeting simply because no one was there to answer for Sierra Waterworks. The citizens who crowded into the fair building were visibly concerned but also civil and polite. The general mood of those present was that they were NOT in favor of this deal with Santa Fe, and everyone that voiced their opinion felt piping water out of our basin to Santa Fe would only cause more water woes for those of us in the Estancia Valley.
    It is well known that many people in this basin have had to either drill a deeper well or even try to find another site to drill another domestic well. This basin is already feeling the pains of having to support many local residents, and our ground-water level has reached an alarmingly low level, so it's hard for me to understand how Cyle Sharp (and his partners) thinks he's doing the valley such a huge favor.
    Cyle Sharp states that "the deal" would reduce the ground-water pumping in the Estancia Basin. Could this be because there would be less water in the Estancia Basin for residents to pump for themselves?
    I also cannot do the math when it comes to Cyle Sharp stating that, "We're pumping 4.89 billion gallons a year now. If Santa Fe buys the water, pumping would be reduced to 2.3 billion gallons annually." Farmers run their wells, to water their crops, six months out of the year. They do not, however, run their wells 24/7 during that six-month period. I would guess that if Santa Fe buys the water it is not going to be pumping at the same rate as a farmer does. It will be pumping that water out 24/7, 365 days a year.
    Cyle Sharp also states that "extensive well tests on the two locations, where the pumping would take place, have determined the withdrawals would not impair any senior water rights." This strikes me as a little strange being that many of the "experts" at last week's meeting couldn't even answer this question, as it is pretty much a big mystery what is flowing beneath the ground. I would be interested in knowing who carried out these "extensive well tests," as I'm sure the Estancia Basin Water Planning Committee would be too.
    And don't try to tell me that this valley won't ever run out of water. All we have to do is look at one of the several ruins in this area to see that it has happened in the past. The Estancia Valley doesn't have much going for it in the way of an economy, but we do have some of the finest water in the state. I think the residents of this valley should be fighting, tooth and nail, to keep it here.
    I'm sorry that Santa Fe has water problems, but most of those problems are "self-inflicted" by the way their government makes decisions and also because they refuse to clear trees (dead or alive) and institute a good watershed program. I don't believe that their "ignorance" should be the problem of the Estancia Valley Water Basin residents. We are not to be blamed, nor should we have to pay, for their decisions.
    The most important thing that we as concerned citizens can do is to flood the State Engineer's Office with letters, stating our concern over this matter and also letting it be know about how this is going to adversely affect the many residents here in the valley. If the State Engineer's Office receives enough letters against this, it will HAVE to grant us a hearing. This will give us the time we need to go through the proper channels to get this water basin adjudicated so that no more water could be pumped out of this valley. This is something that should have been done 100 years ago, but I'm sure that the "old-timers" never dreamed they would have to defend the water in the valley.
    There are MANY, MANY more questions that need addressing and many concerns that are not included here. Where do we go to get these answers?
    Citizens of the Estancia Valley Water Basin, please, get involved. Please send your letters to the State Engineer's Office in Albuquerque (that is the office that will either approve or disapprove this water transfer) and also copy your letter to the office in Santa Fe. Below you will see the addresses to both offices.
    I am always amazed when I see this valley come together for a common goal, and I am very proud when I see what is accomplished when this happens. Folks, it's that time again. Let's once again prove our strength when we pull together and protect what's ours.
    Office of State Engineer
    121 Tijeras NE Suite 2000
    Albuquerque, N.M. 87102
    State Engineer Office
    Bataan Memorial Building
    P.O. Box 25102
    Santa Fe, N.M. 87502-5102
    Shellie Langley is a resident of the Ewing area between Estancia and Mountainair.
#EQ#The Associated Press**misformed if statement**