These days, it is not just the weather that is heating up. Almaty is witnessing yet another bout of fierce debate – this time over the city authorities' decision to cover the aryks (open irrigation channels) with concrete slabs. Residents are concerned that the city is losing yet another source of coolness, and during this spell of abnormally hot weather, the issue feels particularly acute. Everyone is asking: will the southern metropolis be left without its babbling aryks?

Many regard the aryk system as one of Almaty's signature features – part of its historical character, shaped over decades alongside the city itself. This is precisely why the decision to cover part of the open aryks with concrete slabs has provoked such a painful reaction from residents, giving rise to a host of urban, environmental, and bureaucratic concerns.

Officially, it all looks rather pragmatic: the city's Public Spaces Development Department explains that open aryks pose a safety risk – someone might trip and fall – and that by covering them, the city will rid itself of the perennial headache of clogged channels filled with litter, leaves, and sand. In the eyes of our municipal managers, the one true and wise solution is to cover the aryks with slabs, leaving manholes every 5–6 metres for maintenance. The water will still flow as before, just beneath a concrete lid. Wider pavements, less debris – that is the logic.

The problem is that around 15 per cent of the city's aryks have already been covered, and in some sections, open channels have disappeared altogether, making way for cycle paths and new pedestrian zones. In short, the situation looks like this: officials write reports about yet another piece of engineering optimisation, while Almaty residents raise the alarm.

Opponents of the redevelopment are not against aesthetics per se; their most painful argument is the dying trees and vegetation along the aryks. The aryks were not designed merely as gutters – they included a system of openings through which water seeps into the soil, nourishing the trees along the streets. Seal those openings with concrete, and the trees are cut off from their accustomed water source. To back this up, social media users have shared videos from Zharokov Street showing an excavator aggressively cutting into the ground near mature trees, damaging their roots. One eyewitness claims to have seen an aryk being covered while water was still running through it.

Following the wave of public outrage, the city's Department of Ecology launched an investigation into whether concreting could harm the environment, stating that the study is not yet complete and that it is too early to draw conclusions.

WATER AS A NATURAL AIR CONDITIONER

In recent years, we have heard a great deal about climate change and global warming. This summer has been a stark confirmation of that troubling hypothesis. And it is hard to predict what weather zigzags lie ahead.

In this context, we can look at the aryks not through the eyes of a pedestrian, but through the eyes of a climatologist. Almaty lies at the foot of the mountains, and during hot weather, there is a noticeable temperature difference between the built-up, concrete-clad city centre with its traffic and the foothills. Open water in the aryks creates natural cooling, lowering the air temperature at ground level.

Removing that water from open contact with the air is equivalent to intensifying the very "urban heat island effect" that city climatologists have been warning about for years.

The aryks carry water from the mountains down into the city, and the temperature differential between the cold water and the scorching asphalt generates air movement that helps the city breathe a little and not choke in its own smog. Concrete simply switches off this circulation.

THE "LESS LITTER" ARGUMENT – IS IT VALID?

Any moderately heavy downpour in the city causes flooding. And by sealing the aryks under thick concrete slabs to prevent clogging, we may achieve the opposite effect. Any open aryk can be cleaned in minutes with little effort: you walk up, pull out the branches, and move on. But debris that gets trapped under the slabs between the sparse manholes will be almost impossible to remove. Water stagnates there, starts to emit foul odours, and these sections also become a haven for rodents.

Now imagine a heavy rainstorm: a covered aryk can only take in water through those same few manholes, and during a downpour, the water will simply flow over the slabs, turning the streets into rivers. What was intended as a solution risks creating a whole new – and potentially hazardous – situation.

Disrupting a system that has evolved over decades only strengthens the resolve of its defenders.

Russian urbanist Arkady Gershman, who has long studied urban climate, weighed in on the situation, calling Almaty's aryks one of the most effective practical tools for combating summer heat in an urban environment. He remarked, not without irony, that this technology apparently proved "too sophisticated" for the city, given that it is gradually doing away with it.

Almaty residents know that the technical condition of the aryks is far from perfect. But in the petition they have launched, they are not demanding that "everything be left as it is" – rather, they are calling for a moratorium on the current works and a fundamental rethink of the approach. Their proposal is far less radical than concreting: they want proper barriers (possibly along the lines of metal grilles), adequate lighting, and regular maintenance, urging the city authorities to address safety issues without destroying the system itself.

This shows that, at its core, the dispute is not about slabs and manholes. It is a clash of two fundamentally different visions of the city. If the akimat (city administration) views the aryk as an engineering network that can and should be upgraded for cheaper maintenance and greater pedestrian safety, then for residents, it is a climatically integral part of the urban ecosystem and their familiar aesthetic.

The petition drive and the heated social media debates show that citizens are prepared to defend not just convenience, but also the very character of their city—and that pragmatism in this case is not only misplaced but actively harmful.

Hence the growing calls to halt the work and dismantle the sections already covered.

The voice of reason says that any modernisation should not come at the expense of the greater good. That is why kerbstones and paving slabs have provoked not joy but outright rejection among Almaty residents, along with accusations of money laundering and squandering budget funds on excesses.

Almaty is a unique city, built wisely, with foresight and love. Its origins lie with talented architects and urban planners who possessed deep environmental and urbanist knowledge and experience. Thanks to their efforts, we live in a cosy, beautiful and, most importantly, green city. This greenery is what saves us all during these unbearably sweltering days. In a city with a natural gradient, a special infrastructure was devised, including the aryk system.

And ill-considered intervention through concreting could have a catastrophic impact, disrupting the microclimate and destroying this fragile system of natural air purification. At a time when groundwater levels are already falling and precipitation is decreasing, complete waterproofing of the canals with concrete risks irreversible consequences.

The protest from civil society therefore appears entirely justified. Before making such decisions, the city services must understand and anticipate the possible risks and avoid ill-conceived infrastructural solutions.

Aryks buried under concrete for the sake of short-term convenience for utilities threaten to lead to long-term environmental problems, increased smog, the death of green spaces, and regular flooding. The argument that more people have been falling into them has again drawn sarcasm and bewilderment from residents. They point out that when the trams were removed, the authorities also claimed that tram brakes were suddenly failing more often...

And most importantly, in these difficult times, the city should be run by a prudent, thrifty manager – one who does not squander taxpayers' money on endless asphalt battles or pave streets with low-quality, short-lived paving stones, but rather focuses on critical areas: power substations, which have been failing under the load during these hot days; converting the CHP plant to environmentally friendly fuel; building kindergartens, of which the city has a dire shortage; and so on. Against this backdrop, the aryk issue seems out of place. And if someone is eager to monetise concrete production, they would do better to invest in the construction of vital social infrastructure.

Given the civic engagement of the residents, it might be wiser to address such issues through open dialogue involving ecologists, architects, experts, and the citizens themselves. Then any modernisation would not harm the city, nor destroy what makes Almaty truly alive.

By Akmaral ABDULOVA