Diverse interests including the Salt River Project, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and Center for Biological Diversity ratcheted up their demands in 2008 for Prescott, Prescott Valley and Chino Valley to create a mitigation plan before pumping water from the Big Chino Sub-basin to the north.
They exerted their pressure via local public presentations, direct letters to the municipalities, and comments submitted to the Arizona Department of Water Resources in connection with several complicated state rulemaking projects that will affect directly how local governments use Big Chino water.
The powerful Salt River Project (SRP) even contended that a 1991 law giving Prescott the right to import Big Chino water is unconstitutional.
Local municipalities argue that they are taking mitigation measures such as the purchase of a ranch and groundwater level monitoring. However, they have not produced any comprehensive plans. Prescott and Prescott Valley already are buying right-of-way for the pipeline from Prescott's Big Chino Ranch west of Paulden.
The Big Chino water-use plans have been a source of controversy because scientists generally agree that 80 percent of the baseflow of the Upper Verde River comes from the Big Chino aquifer.
While SRP wants the river to keep flowing on down to its Phoenix-area customers, the Center for Biological Diversity and Fish and Wildlife Service fear that diminished flows could hurt wildlife that depend on the rare perennial desert river.
SRP's consultant concluded that within one year after Chino Valley starts pumping groundwater from the Wineglass ranch (aka garlic farm) four miles above the river's headwaters, it could reduce the flow of the river's headwater springs by 11 cubic feet per second (47 percent) within 10-20 years.
U.S. Fish and Wildlife officials have spoken at several local water meetings in support of a comprehensive Habitat Conservation Plan through that agency.
The Center for Biological Diversity started a "Save the Verde" program that calls on the public to voice support for a Habitat Conservation Plan. "SRP wants an agreed-upon monitoring and mitigation plan before pumping begins," SRP spokesman Scott Harelson said.
"We will take any and all actions, including litigation, to protect our shareholders' interests," wrote John Sullivan, associate general manager of SRP's water group, in a letter to Chino Valley.
SRP increased its pressure on Chino by appealing a state conclusion that it was already legal for Chino to buy groundwater rights from "historically irrigated acres" on 26 different Big Chino properties, yet pump all the water from the town's garlic farm.
A state appeals agency sided with SRP, concluding that the Department of Water Resources must first undertake a formal rulemaking process that includes public comment. That hasn't started yet.
Meanwhile, numerous Big Chino water players protested other new draft Arizona Department of Water Resources rules that they contended give Prescott an unfair advantage in using Big Chino water.
The Town of Chino Valley, two Big Chino Valley landowners, Yavapai County Supervisor Carol Springer, and the Center for Biological Diversity all submitted letters criticizing the draft rules.
The rules dealing with the logistics of interbasin groundwater transfers appeared to assign a 1991 priority date to Prescott's right to use Big Chino groundwater.
An attorney for the Chino Grande Ranch partners on the Chino Valley pipeline said the rule is "likely to defeat" efforts to finance the CV pipeline if the state sticks with the draft.
The Arizona Department of Water Resources also has started working on rules to implement a new state law the Legislature approved in 2008.
The new law generally gives counties the right to reject new subdivisions that don't have adequate 100-year water supplies.
Posted: Tuesday, December 30, 2008
Article comment by:
Prescott's Last Oasis is Conservation
We live a lifestyle considerably above our real water “income”. We celebrate water-gulping exotic planting, evaporative spray large lawns, flood lush landscapes, we allow out-of-control development / population growth, unfettered waste of valuable water, and numerous, vast, water-squandering golf courses. As a result, we have been going deeper and deeper into water debt - our aquifer's water account is being overused, mined, depleted, and not replaced. We are 161 + Billion Gallons in debt! However... If we all used less than 35 gallons a day and if we controlled our population growth we could sip forever and not worry about the cost of a pipeline or draining the Upper Verde! Prescott’s last oasis is conservation!
Posted: Tuesday, December 30, 2008
Article comment by:
Water = Money for the Rich!
It's all another big scam for the rich land owner and developers with the Good Ole Boy Mafia. Water = Money. You will lose your river, pay more for water and they will get richer.
Only one answer; Get the maggot politicians out of office that feed on the average taxpayer. They are lying two faced lapdogs.
Posted: Tuesday, December 30, 2008
Article comment by:
STOP THE GROWTH AND SAVE THE RIVER
Real Reason - You know what else has nothing to do with Saving the Verde? The Upper Verde River Watershed Protection Coalition. Before you go calling out people/entities with mixed agendas you should check that one out. An entire governmental body, paid for with tax dollars, and organized just to promote the myth that the municipalities actually care about the Verde. It is truly sickening, along with the PR campaign that pays bloggers like you....
Posted: Tuesday, December 30, 2008
Article comment by:
P.O.'d in Paulden
"The Real Reason" many of us oppose the pipeline, is that OUR futures depend on our wells. When they go dry, where do we get water from? Buy it back from P.V. and Prescott ? Thanks, but no no thanks ! I'm not "no growth", but I'm certainly not in favor of it at mine and my family's expense. So many have that cavalier attitude of "Let them eat cake", when it comes to us small landowners. Sure you can trust the government to do what's best, just ask the Native Americans !
Posted: Tuesday, December 30, 2008
Article comment by:
The Real Reason
This opposition has absolutely nothing to do with saving the Verde River. This is about people who do not want any more growth in the area.
Posted: Tuesday, December 30, 2008
Article comment by:
Stop this fiasco...
If 'two big landowners' and the self-serving 'Carol Springer' are against it ... it must be a very, very good thing! SELL THE WATER RANCH! Waste no more of our tax dollars on this ill-conceived pipe dream. Support thoughtful future growth. Quality of life trumps uncontrolled growth every time.
Posted: Tuesday, December 30, 2008
Article comment by:
No name provided
About time someone opposes this plan to destroy what is left of the Verde River. Will the Daily Courier take a stand on this issue?
