1. Water Resources Research Center Offers A Newly Revised Water Poster. Cost $12.00. The Water Resources Research Center is pleased to announce the release of the new Arizona Water Map Poster, the latest in our series of reliable and concise visual representations of Arizona’s water resources. This, the fourth edition of the map is the product of a design and review process that engaged stakeholders from across regions and sectors. The new map reflects the current state of water resources in Arizona, as well as a culture of management and planning unique to the state.
Notable updates and changes include:
Stronger emphasis on water supply and demand among different water using sectors and regions Inclusion of ADWR’s 22 planning areas Updated data to reflect current knowledge Updated appearance to reflects modern design technique Emphasis on groundwater usage Highlighted population density New map on recharge and subsidence New natural terrain background using Esri’s multi-directional hillshade
Checks should be made payable to: The University of Arizona / WRRC (check must have two payees)
Mail checks to:
U of A / WRRC; Attn: LaVonne Walton
P.O. Box 210437
Tucson AZ 85721-043
Questions:LaVonne Walton by telephone:
(520) 621-5648 / (520) 621-9591 or by
email: waltonl@email.arizona.edu.
To order a poster, go online to
https://wrrc.arizona.edu/arizona-water-map-form?utm_source=WRRC+Weekly+Wave%2C+Vol.+5%2C+Iss ue+18+%285%2F5%2F17%29&utm_campaign=WW-5%2F5%2F17&utm_medium=email
ADEQ Launches Stormwater Permitting in myDEQ this June. Register today to obtain, manage or terminate NOIs and submit e-DMRs using myDEQ, ADEQ’s online portal.*
As a myDEQ user, starting this June, you can:
Submit NOIs online at your convenience, 24/7
Instantly receive an NOI Certificate and confirmation emails**
Submit an e-DMR
Receive DMR email reminders so you never miss a deadline
Easily update your informatio
Register now at: http://azdeq.gov/myDEQ/register
*After May 31, 2017, ADEQ will no longer accept paper applications for Stormwater CGP & MSGP NOIs or NOTs, and Smart NOI will no longer be available online.
**Applies only when a SWPPP review is not required. If a SWPPP is required, it can take up to 30 calendar days for CGP and 32 business days for MSGP to issue an NOI Certificate.
Questions? Email — myDEQ.support@azdeq.gov
What these letters mean: (editor’s explanation)
CGP – Construction General Permit
MSGP- Multi-Sector General Permit
NOI- Notice of Intent
e-DMR- electronic Discharge Monitoring Report
SWPPP – Storm Water Pollution Protection Plan
NOT – Notice of Termination
Smart NOI- Smart Notice of Intent: a web program to determine the cost of your permit (online at https://ptl.az.gov/app/smartnoi/(S(fejs2wviov04zo2bx0p5qyci))/default.aspx)
3. Celebrating Safety: Passage of S.B. 1478 Enacts Successful Safety Program. This year, the State Legislature passed and the Governor signed Sen. Steve Smith’s S.B. 1478, a bill that—in addition to various changes to the state’s occupational safety and health statutes—codifies an extremely successful safety program known as the Voluntary Protection Program, or VPP.
The VPP was established by the Arizona Division of Occupational Safety and Health (ADOSH) to foster reduction of injuries and illnesses in the workplace through the cooperative efforts of management, labor, and government. VPP recognizes employers and workers in the private industry and federal agencies who have implemented effective safety and health management systems and maintain injury and illness rates below national Bureau of Labor Statistics averages for their respective industries. In VPP, management, labor, and federal OSHA work cooperatively and proactively to prevent fatalities, injuries, and illnesses through a system focused on the four foundational principles of: hazard prevention and control; worksite analysis; training; and management commitment and worker involvement.
4. What Should You Stop Doing to Improve Safety Performance and Culture? Source: By Shawn M. Galloway
Thinking we can always be better, and hazards and risks can always be reduced, should dominate thinking throughout an organization.
What should you not do or stop doing that will improve safety performance and culture? These are difficult questions for most leadership teams to answer and agree on. There tends to be a common belief we should always do more in safety. We want to improve, so we need to do more. We had an injury or incident, so we need to do more. We want to be top-tier, so we need to do more. Rather than always trying to do more, the goal should be to do better. More isn’t always better. Better is better.
When reviewing current safety efforts with clients to determine whether they should continue, be modified, or ceased (or when pressure is felt to have a knee-jerk reaction to change direction), the following considerations and questions have been helpful to many leadership teams.
Creates False Sense of Security—Do our current efforts, or will the new effort, create a false sense of security? Traditional safety measurements (both lagging and leading indicators) often fall into this area. We haven’t had as many injuries, or we have reached zero recordables. Our indicators of number of observations, audits, employee training, and perception surveys indicate we are good. Therefore, we must be safe; it won’t happen to us. Maintaining a sense of vulnerability is critical in safety. Results and indicators should be recognized and celebrated, but they should also be deeply understood. Moreover, thinking we can always be better, and hazards and risks can always be reduced, should dominate thinking throughout an organization. What else might be creating a dangerous sense of overconfidence or invulnerability?
Demotivates, Disengages & Upsets Customers—Do our current efforts, or will the new effort, demotivate, disengage, and/or upset the customers of safety?
Distracts From or Disrupts Vision and Strategy—Do our current efforts, or will the new effort, distract from or disrupt our vision and strategy? An effective strategy is a framework of choices, tradeoffs, and small bets made to determine how to create and deliver sustainable value. Your strategy should define: 1) Where you are going; 2) What success will look like in observable terms, not just results; 3) Where you are right now and where you have come from; 4) No more than a few strategic priorities aimed at both improving safety performance and culture; and 5) Measurements that provide a sense of progress and validate the priorities and efforts that support them are adding sustainable value over time. Few strategies are so perfectly defined they aren’t modified during execution. Sometimes the playing field changes underneath our feet and we need to adjust, but the adjustment should come from data and not opinions. Source: April 2017 issue of “Occupational Health & Safety”.
5. War Of Words Flares In Arizona Over Lake Mead Water. Officials in Arizona have reached an impasse on a multistate agreement aimed at storing more Colorado River water in Lake Mead, but Southern Nevada Water Authority chief John Entsminger said he is confident the deal will still get done.
Since 2015, Nevada, California and Arizona have been negotiating a drought contingency plan to keep Lake Mead from shrinking enough to trigger a first-ever federal shortage declaration and force Nevada and Arizona to cut their use of river water
Despite recent signs of discord, Entsminger said the states are still “holding fi rm” to an agreement in principle under which Nevada, Arizona and, eventually, California would voluntarily reduce use and leave water in Lake Mead when the surface of the reservoir falls to certain trigger points.
He said he expects the plan to be finalized late this year or early next year, once the “diverse constituencies” of water users in Arizona and California figure out how the voluntary cuts will be made in each state. Apparently, Arizona has more work to do.
Recently, three of the state’s top water managers have staked out opposing positions on the contingency plan in dueling opinion pieces published in the Arizona Republic. Board members Alexandra Arboleda and Mark Taylor from the Central Arizona Water Conservation District got things started on April 21, when they floated an alternate plan in the state’s largest newspaper to artificially keep Lake Mead just above the trigger point for a shortage, a move they said would force the release of more water from Lake Powell upstream while lessening the need for water reductions in Arizona.
Tom Buschatzke, director of the Arizona Department of Water Resources, responded Sunday with an op-ed of his own dismissing Arboleda and Taylor’s idea as a “risky gambit” that seeks to game the system. “It doesn’t hold water. I won’t support it. It’s that simple,” he wrote.
The unusual public exchange hints at a long-simmering power struggle between Buschatzke’s agency and the Central Arizona Water Conservation District, which operates and maintains the canals that deliver Colorado River water to Phoenix and Tucson.
Buschatzke downplayed the dispute in a follow-up statement Wednesday, noting that progress is being made on “an intra-Arizona plan.”
“It is conceivable an agreement among Arizona water users could occur later this year,” he said. “However, it is likely the Arizona Legislature will not be in session then. Thus, the most likely time frame for (contingency plan) approval will be early next year.” Las Vegas Jouenal Review May 1, 2017
6. Binational Tour Reflects Cohesive And Collaborative Effort Among CAP, ADWR And SRP. On April 18 – 20, CAP, along with the Arizona Department of Water Resources (ADWR) and Salt River Project (SRP), hosted a tour focused on Central Arizona Water Efficiency as part of the Arizona-Mexico Commission’s goal to continue and improve upon the transboundary information exchange. Mexico Tour Presentation
Day one highlighted municipal and industrial water recycling facilities, in addition to underground water storage facilities and CAP operations. Day two focused primarily on agricultural efficiency and conservation. The tour included stops at the City of Scottsdale Water Campus, CAP Headquarters, the Liberty Aquifer Replenishment Facility, the Arizona Public Service (APS) Energy Education Center, the Gila River Indian Community, Maricopa Stanfield Irrigation and Drainage District, Knorr farms, the Maricopa Agricultural Center and SRP Headquarters with additional presentations made by the Arizona Governor’s Office, ADWR, the University of Arizona Agricultural Extension and Research and the City of Phoenix. Thirty water managers and water users from Mexico including the Director and Commissioners of the Sonora State Water Commission, the Baja California State Water Commission, the US and Mexico Sections of the International Boundary and Water Commission and participants representing the Mexico National Water Agency, Mexicali Water District (District 14), the Rio Yaqui and the Rio Mayo Water Districts attended.
“What we showed tour participants on this trip was the fact that in Arizona we’re basically using every drop of water, at least in central Arizona, every drop of water that’s available. While we use a lot of water for potable uses, we take the reclaimed water that’s generated from those potable uses and use it for a variety of projects which they saw over the two days,” said Dave Roberts, SRP’s Associate General Manger of Water Resources and Co-Chair of the Environment and Water Committee with the Arizona-Mexico Commission.
It is because of the long-standing relationship and shared concern for reliable water supplies that water leaders from the Arizona–Sonora region come together to work collaboratively to develop constructive solutions that are mutually beneficial. Through continuous dialogue and efforts like the Central Arizona Water Efficiency tour, Mexico is able to learn more about how to move water from different sectors and how to do it in a way that addresses water management and planning holistically.
While Arizona continues to be a leader in water management and planning, it also continues to grow, and our water needs will require additional creative collaborations and partnerships to ensure elevation levels in Lake Mead do not drop precipitously low. Water contributions to Lake Mead by Mexico, Arizona, California, Nevada and the U.S. have protected all water users including those in Mexico from shortages, but more will be required in the future. Programs like the Lower Basin Drought Contingency Plan (LBDCP) and Minute 32X are positive steps in the right direction.
“Partnering and collaboration have characterized Arizona’s water arena for decades,” said CAP General Manager Ted Cooke, “and working closely together to resolve the major water challenges facing our region will become even more critical moving forward. As this tour illustrates, strengthening the relationships among all of the Colorado River stakeholders are key to a successful future as we look to finalize and implement Minute 32x with Mexico, and the LBDCP among the Lower Basin States and the Bureau of Reclamation. Read more at http://www.cap-az.com/public/blog/643-bi-national-tour-refl ects-cohesive-and-collaborative-effort-among-cap-adwr-and-srp
7. Celebrating Mother’s Day. Mother’s Day is a holiday honoring motherhood that is observed in different forms throughout the world. The American incarnation of Mother’s Day was created by Anna Jarvis in 1908 and became an official U.S. holiday in 1914. Jarvis would later denounce the holiday’s commercialization and spent the latter part of her life trying to remove it from the calendar. While dates and celebrations vary, Mother’s Day most commonly falls on the second Sunday in May and traditionally involves presenting mothers with flowers, cards and other gifts.
Celebrations of mothers and motherhood can be traced back to the ancient Greeks and Romans, who held festivals in honor of the mother goddesses Rhea and Cybele, but the clearest modern precedent for Mother’s Day is the early Christian festival known as “Mothering Sunday.”
Once a major tradition in the United Kingdom and parts of Europe, this celebration fell on the fourth Sunday in Lent and was originally seen as a time when the faithful would return to their “mother church”—the main church in the vicinity of their home—for a special service.
Over time the Mothering Sunday tradition shifted into a more secular holiday, and children would present their mothers with flowers and other tokens of appreciation. This custom eventually faded in popularity before merging with the American Mother’s Day in the 1930s and 1940s.
The origins of Mother’s Day as celebrated in the United States date back to the 19th century. In the years before the Civil War, Ann Reeves Jarvis of West Virginia helped start “Mothers’ Day Work Clubs” to teach local women how to properly care for their children.
These clubs later became a unifying force in a region of the country still divided over the Civil War. In 1868 Jarvis organized “Mothers’ Friendship Day,” at which mothers gathered with former Union and Confederate soldiers to promote reconciliation.
Another precursor to Mother’s Day came from the abolitionist and suffragette Julia Ward Howe. In 1870 Howe wrote the “Mother’s Day Proclamation,” a call to action that asked mothers to unite in promoting world peace. In 1873 Howe campaigned for a “Mother’s Peace Day” to be celebrated every June 2.
The official Mother’s Day holiday arose in the 1900s as a result of the efforts of Anna Jarvis, daughter of Ann Reeves Jarvis. Following her mother’s 1905 death, Anna Jarvis conceived of Mother’s Day as a way of honoring the sacrifices mothers made for their children.
After gaining financial backing from a Philadelphia department store owner named John Wanamaker, in May 1908 she organized the first official Mother’s Day celebration at a Methodist church in Grafton, West Virginia. That same day also saw thousands of people attend a Mother’s Day event at one of Wanamaker’s retail stores in Philadelphia.
Anna Jarvis’s version of the day involved wearing a white carnation as a badge and visiting one’s mother or attending church services. But once Mother’s Day became a national holiday, it was not long before florists, card companies and other merchants capitalized on its popularity. Source: History.com
