The Argos Reservoir Farmers Association (Associación de Regantes de Argos) has accused a group of members of trying to start a war between two factions: those in favour of modernizing the irrigation systems and those who oppose it.
In a strongly worded statement the Association answers criticism recently made during a demonstration by those opposing the move in Calasparra.
The Association states that the modernization of the irrigation systems was declared “of general interest” in the year 2000 under the Fiscal Measures, Administrations and Social Order Law and that the project was declared “a priority and urgent” in 2005.
Details of the project had published on various occasions including by the Segura Water Board in 2008.
The declaration on the environmental impact of the project was approved by the regional government and the Secretary of State for Climate Change on June 25, 2010.
The statement goes on to say the modernization aims to improve the irrigation infrastructures by optimizing the efficient use of water through introducing drop irrigation systems and to improve the management of water resources by: improving the quality of production and introducing automatic systems to facilitate management by the Association.
The aim of the modernization is “to solve the numerous problems that we have today,” says the statement.
Many farmers and small holders currently have to water their land during the night; the caudal of the water is variable and is often “cut off” by neighbours; the irrigation rota is irregular with some properties getting water every eight days while others get it every 24 days; the deterioration of the irrigation channels, many of which consist of earth, permit seepage; and there is loss of water during the night which benefit no-one.
With respect to the alleged lack of information the Association says: “We have to indicate that this project has had a long career.”
In 1997 an Extraordinary Assembly approved tubing for the irrigation channels and the modernization of irrigation systems in Calasparra.
In 1999 an Extraordinary General Meeting approved the budget for the tubing and for the modernization of all irrigation systems.
In 2006 an Extraordinary General meeting approved a modified project with water for every property and finance with ACUAMED.
In 2011 new system of funding and finance offered by SEIASA was approved after problems with the ACUAMED funding.
In February 2012 a motion was approved at the full Town Hall Meeting in which all three parties supported the project for the modernization of the irrigation systems.
Since 2006 when the project was first approved full information had been available for public inspection at the office of the Association, says the statement, “but only two or three people have been to see it.”
The project has been repeatedly discussed and approved at General Public Meetings by members of the Association, continues the statement.
According to the local police only 250 people attended the recent demonstration opposing the modernization and just 60 signatures were collected on a petition. Some 70% of those who signed the petition did not attend or vote in the General Public Meeting in November 2011.
The Association will continue to defend the project “because it has been properly presented and approved:”
The 11.000.000 euro project is 70% financed by the EU (7.700.000 euros) and 30% funded by the community. This 30% will be paid through the annual irrigation water bill which will include the corresponding part of the cost of modernization (which is approximately 9 euros per unit annually) plus the general costs of the Association. This means that the total cost of changing the irrigation systems will be a total of 333 euros per unit.
According to the Association this plan is the only way to save agriculture in Calasparra: through modern production and dignity for the farmer and the creation of more than 100 employment posts.
“The current irrigation systems are beneficial for some farmers and prejudicial for others and the maintenance of the irriqation channels is expensive, bad and inefficient,” concludes the statement.
