PRESCOTT - For local scientist Anthony Krzysik, the Verde River is more than merely a nearby waterway.
"It's just an outstanding place," Krzysik said of the river that originates north of Paulden. "It is a great place for hiking, bird-watching, photography, and canoeing."
Krzysik's comments were part of the testimony that took place Monday during the continuation of the Office of Administrative Hearings' review of the Arizona Department of Water Resources' late-2008 ruling on Prescott's use of Big Chino water.
The decision entitled Prescott to pump 8,067 acre-feet of water per year from the Paulden-area Big Chino sub-basin, which is near the headwaters of the Verde.
As Krzysik and others who have objected to the ADWR decision see it, the future of the Verde hinges, in part, on the outcome of the review. His was among the testimony Monday that strove to tie Prescott's proposed Big Chino pumping to the fate of the Verde's fish and wildlife.
But just the premise of that argument generated plenty of debate among the half-dozen or so attorneys representing the various interests.
While attorneys for the local appellants maintained that the argument was relevant because of the possible future harm to habitat, the lawyers representing Prescott and ADWR contended the issue was beyond the purview of the state.
"There is a substantial likelihood, over the next 100 years, that there would be a violation of federal law, including the Endangered Species Act," Lisa McKnight of the Salmon, Lewis & Weldon law firm said in her representation of the local appellants.
But Scott Deeny, representing ADWR, questioned whether either his department or Administrative Law Judge Thomas Shedden, who was overseeing the review, had jurisdiction.
"They're asking you to make that determination," Deeny told Shedden of a ruling on the probability of a future violation of the Endangered Species Act. "(ADWR) does not believe you have that authority."
Even so, Shedden agreed to hear evidence on the matter - up a point.
For most of the morning, Shedden listened to retired U.S. Forest Service Fisheries Biologist Jerome Stefferud talk about the probability that Prescott's pumping would diminish the flow of the Verde, ultimately harming endangered fish species such as the spike dace and the razorback sucker.
But when the afternoon testimony by U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Field Supervisor Brenda Smith touched on some of the same information, Shedden interrupted and cautioned the attorneys about "spending too much time on cumulative evidence."
Indeed, the review already is taking at least twice as long as previously anticipated. Initially, officials expected the administrative review to wrap up in the first three-day round of hearings Feb. 9-11.
But when the third day ended with just one of the sides - the City of Prescott - having completed its argument, Shedden scheduled another three days of hearings for April 13-15.
By the time Monday's hearing ended at 5 p.m., the three local appellants - Gary Beverly, Tom Atkins, and Krzysik - had yet to complete their case, with ADWR and more appellants still to make their cases.
Similar to the line of questioning that Prescott's attorneys brought up when Atkins testified in February, several of Monday's questions focused on the three appellants' relationship with the Salt River Project.
Even though a Maricopa County Superior Court judge earlier ruled that the Phoenix utility company could not be an official participant in the hearing, SRP has been a visible force in the three appellants' case.
For instance, several of the experts who have testified have been consultants who also work for SRP. In addition, the local appellants' law firm is the same company that represents SRP.
Attorney Rita Maguire, representing Prescott, tried to get specific about SRP's financial involvement in the appellants' case Monday, when she asked Krzysik, "Are you bearing the sole expense" for the case?
That led to an objection by Salmon, Lewis & Weldon Attorney Mark McGinnis, however, who maintained that such information is subject to "attorney/client privilege."
After the close of Monday's hearing, Beverly said he and the other appellants each "have spent some of our own funds" on the case.
He allowed, however, that "it's a very expensive process. Obviously, SRP is making a major contribution - as the citizens of Prescott are making a major contribution (toward the city's defense of the ruling)."
The case revolves around the plans by Prescott and its partner Prescott Valley to build a 30-mile pipeline from the Big Chino sub-basin to the tri-city area for water importation.
When the hearing gets under way again at 8 a.m. today, the first matter of discussion will be the contents of Prescott's 1994 "Groundwater Study of the Big Chino Valley."
The hearing is taking place at Yavapai College's Building 19, 1100 E. Sheldon Street.
Reader Comments
Posted: Tuesday, April 14, 2009
Article comment by:
PAUL F. MILLER
The Verde River and its tributaries are the largest contributors to the Salt River system - dominion of SRP - while I do not proclaim to be fully conversant with all the myriad ramifications associated with the plethora of legal actions pending and/or threatened, it seems to me the name of this game is DIVIDE & CONQUER. This is an excellent tactic on the part of SRP and over the years they have utilized it extremely well, to their sole benefit. SRP is the octopus whose tentacles reach into virtually every water source North of "metro" Phoenix. SRP has a room of attorney with nothing to do except "sue" and deflect common sense into their legal-linglistic-jargon designed to make you and me feel inadequate. And it works, every time, because "we" - that's you and me - are fearful of calling their bluff. Demand and accept nothing less than full, open, honest, timely DISCLOSURE from SRP or ADEQ or ADWR or any politician. Remember in ALL cases they work for us.... we do not work for them. This water dispute has gone on long enough, we can honestly settle it, if we choose.
Posted: Tuesday, April 14, 2009
Article comment by:
Vickie Stuart T2 Ranch Paulden
This is just one more example of greed by investors and politicians in the Tri-City area. We live in the Big Chino Basin a very rural part of Paulden where this water will be extracted. I see developers trying to buy up land here (from Missouri etc.) and wanting to own the water too. This will become a war with landowners and politicians. Mind you it is not in best interest for the environment, ranches or wildlife. It benefits only the pockets it will line. Do we not have an obligation to our future generations to protect these valuable assets? The money spent & obtained will long be gone along with the habitat it destroyed. The public needs to be aware of the impact. I don't want to be around to let mother nature know we drank her dry out of greed.
Posted: Tuesday, April 14, 2009
Article comment by:
No name provided
Clean Wtr is precious, DOn't Waste It. How many fish will it save then How many Family Homes will it provide safe Wtr to???
Posted: Tuesday, April 14, 2009
Article comment by:
Hilarious
Honestly, you couldn't write a more ridiculous storyline than this if you got paid. "Local resident expresses his love for the river. Then lawyers in sharkskin zootsuits take over and argue about jurisdiction for the rest of the afternoon. The crowd heads for the exits en masse." On second thought I think I'd rather watch The Family Guy. Way funnier.
Posted: Tuesday, April 14, 2009
Article comment by:
Ron R. Harvey
How many Prescott-area residents are spending their own money in order to support the pipeline? My guess is, not one.
Posted: Tuesday, April 14, 2009
Article comment by:
Tom Steele
Remember Mark Twain; Whiskey is for drinkin', and water is for fightin'. Nothing has changed except the guns have been replaced by lawyers at $399 per hour. They win regardless. Ask yourself; if Prescott and Prescott Valley "really" are concerned with "protecting" the headwaters of the Verde; why has it rejected all mitigation? Why have these developer-backed politicians continue to use our taxes to fight for water that without legal protections, will kill the Verde River. Then, is it "So sad; too bad" ?
