11/27/2009 9:38:00 PM Study forecasts local water shortages
Future study phases should ‘fit perfectly together’
The Bureau of Reclamation hopes to finish the $150,000 phase I of its Central Yavapai Highlands study in January.
It will include a written report that explains all the numbers.
In phase II, the agency will compile water sources and quantify their available supplies as well as their quality, said Leslie Meyers of the Bureau of Rec.
Phase III will match up needs with supplies and offer more than one alternative, Meyers said. It will analyze human water-use impacts on the environment and look at legal issues and costs.
It will see whether the federal government has a role in helping local governments meet future water needs.
Future phases will try to incorporate climate change projections, Meyers added. In general, scientists predict reduced water supplies as the Southwest continues to heat up.
The Bureau of Rec originally hoped to finish the entire study in three years, but it likely will take longer, Meyers said.
She estimates the entire study will cost at least $600,000, and her agency is committed to covering half of that cost. The Arizona Department of Water Resources provided $150,000, but that might be it because of budget cuts. Local governments are able to provide their match with in-kind contributions such as staff time.
Ongoing studies of ecological water needs for the Verde Basin will be of great help to future Bureau of Rec study phases, Meyers said. So will a U.S. Geological Survey study and future computer model of the basin.
"For a change, it's all going to fit perfectly together," Meyers said.
A draft federal study calculates that most Yavapai County municipalities will face water supply shortages by 2050.
The U.S. Bureau of Reclamation is heading up work on the multi-year study, which it calls the Central Yavapai Highlands Water Resources Management Study.
This past week the agency released draft population and water supply estimates for the first phase of the three-phase study. The study covers only the Upper Verde and Middle Verde portions of the Verde Watershed.
The draft numbers show 2050 water shortages for all municipalities and rural areas of the Upper and Middle Verde except Cornville, Jerome, Camp Verde and the unincorporated Humboldt area.
The worst projected water shortages are 13,875 acre-feet per year for Prescott Valley, 7,123 af/year in Cottonwood, 6,976 af/year in Chino Valley and 6,702 af/year in Prescott.
In all, the estimated shortage for the Upper and Middle Verde area totals at least 46,472 acre-feet annually. By sub-basin, the estimated shortages are 31,677 af/year for the Prescott Active Management Area, 11,886 af/year for the Verde Valley and 2,909 af/year for the Big Chino.
Estimated 2006 water use is 9,692 acre-feet for the Big Chino, 26,507 af for the Prescott AMA and 36,672 af for the Verde Valley.
The study predicts that even remote rural areas such as the Big Chino Basin will face shortages, because of the proposed development of two large ranches that the study estimates would produce 35,000 more residents by 2050. The estimated shortage of 2,909 acre-feet in 2050 does not include the 8,000 af/year that Prescott and Prescott Valley propose to export from the Big Chino. That kind of detail will come in later phases of the study.
A previous estimate for a U.S. Geological Survey computer model estimated the two ranches would produce another 65,000 Big Chino residents by 2050, but Yavapai County Supervisor Carol Springer suggested a lesser number based on current ranch plans, explained Leslie Meyers of the Bureau of Reclamation.
Population estimates vary
The foundations of the water supply estimates are the population figures that the local municipalities and county government provided.
Population estimates for various government studies vary widely, even when they come from the same source.
For example, for a Central Yavapai Metropolitan Planning Organization study of future transportation needs, Prescott estimated its population would top 102,000 by 2030, but for the Bureau of Rec study, Prescott officials estimated the population would hit 100,000 in 2050. Dewey-Humboldt estimated its population would top 29,500 by 2030 in the transportation study, but estimated it would reach only 6,943 by 2050 for the water study.
For the Bureau of Reclamation study, the county estimated that unincorporated areas would grow by an average of 2.25 percent annually, based on growth during the past decade. But over the last 35 years, the average annual population growth in unincorporated Yavapai County has been 3.8 percent. The Arizona Department of Economic Security uses a 1.5 percent growth rate for its estimates.
Camp Verde and Dewey-Humboldt chose to use Arizona Department of Economic Security population estimates for 2050 in the Bureau of Rec study, even though history has shown those numbers to be heavily underestimated.
The phase I Bureau of Rec study calculated future water needs based on current per-capita water use. For example, phase I does not take into account the fact that the Prescott region's current uses are depleting its groundwater supply.
For private wells, the study assumes each household uses one-third of an acre-foot annually. An acre-foot means the water would be one foot deep spread across an acre. It equals 325,851 gallons of water.
The water use numbers assume that agricultural water use will decline across the board, with some declines greater than others. It projects one of the more drastic declines for Chino Valley, from 1,691 acre-feet in 2006 to 158 af in 2050.
WAC review
The Yavapai County Water Advisory Committee reviewed the draft phase I study during its November meeting in Cottonwood. Its members include the county and all its municipalities and tribes.
Leslie Graser of the Arizona Department of Water Resources gave the presentation, which included hundreds of numbers showing population change and water use change by sector. It took more than a year to get the draft done. Meyers was unable to attend the presentation because of a three-day class schedule change.
"This is your regional planning tool at this point," said Graser, who was laid off from her state job the following day because of a budget shortfall.
"This is an absolutely phenomenal amount of work," said former Camp Verde mayor Tony Gioia. However, he criticized some of the population estimates, especially Camp Verde's.
A technical working group comprising various government officials was closely involved in the draft study.
Most of the draft population numbers are the same as the draft numbers that local governments have provided for a U.S. Geological Survey computer model, Meyers said.
However, the Bureau of Rec expanded some of those numbers to include areas outside of the cities where the cities provide water, such as those for Prescott, Prescott Valley and Cottonwood, Meyers said.
The 2050 population estimates include proposed annexation areas, such as the Cavan and Fann properties for Prescott and state trust lands for Cottonwood, Meyers explained.
"We really tried to get people to be as realistic as possible," Meyers said.
Reader Comments
Posted: Sunday, November 29, 2009
Article comment by:
No name provided
Don't take reports about the future of God's Plans, it is just more false profits and teaching. Science and The Bible go together but Science follows The Bible not the other way around.
Posted: Sunday, November 29, 2009
Article comment by:
RJ
The (people) in this two-bit local government will believe this study when there actually IS no more water ... too bad. I can remember this issue being debated as long as I have lived here.....denial continues to be a powerful defense mechanism for the ignorant.
Posted: Sunday, November 29, 2009
Article comment by:
Robert
I agree with "Clarity", "Jeff", Patriot", and "Yukon Jack"! Wake up, people!
Posted: Saturday, November 28, 2009
Article comment by:
Farley
This is rural high desert never meant to sustain large populations. The large landowners/developers and the crooked politicians in their pockets need to be stopped or all is lost.
Posted: Saturday, November 28, 2009
Article comment by:
Quailwood Development
As a former employee of the development, Quailwood by Empire Communities in Dewey, I can tell you studies and subsequent reports are highly influenced by whomever is paying for the study. I know, because we did it. Hydrologists asked us what the report should say and we told them. There is so much corruption where development is concerned. People get filthy rich on it. Has anyone ever wondered about that computer wafer cleansing plant out at the PRC airport? Why would an industry that requires so much water (I heard last that they use 30,000 gal a day) locate themselves in the desert SW and not Washington state? Yeah interesting.
Posted: Saturday, November 28, 2009
Article comment by:
Birther T. Bagur
Everyone knows science isn't real. Saint Reagan (patron saint of teabagging) will provide us with water.
Posted: Saturday, November 28, 2009
Article comment by:
History
This report presented to us by the same agency that brought us Teton Dam. How odd!
Posted: Saturday, November 28, 2009
Article comment by:
One Eyed Jack
Both sides will debate the “data” forever so more studies after studies will be done. I need to get into this water analysis business as I could work forever. On side note will someone that knows Tammy Linn let her know that she has already won that seat on the city council and that her continuous running of ads is a nuisance like the one embedded in this article! Or maybe she is already running for Mayor or County Supervisor? Hum….
Posted: Saturday, November 28, 2009
Article comment by:
Jack D. Wilson, former mayor
This is a draft report of the first phase of a three-phase study. As usual, the Courier reporter fails to put this in the perspective of the overall study. The PowerPoint presentation (slide 36) shows Phase II will focus on a Water Supply Assessment (in addition to present water resources). Phase III will then look at: 1) Alternative Formulation, 2) Alternative Analysis and 3) Alternative Evaluation. Phase III will answer two questions: 1) Is there at least one alternative that can meet the unmet demands? 2) Is there a Federal Interest in the identified alternatives? After phases II and III are completed, then the final report will be developed.
What this means is the Bureau of Reclamation will be looking for alternative sources of water for the study area. They will also determine if it is likely the Federal Government would participate in securing those resources (as was done with the Central Arizona Project).
Our neighbors to the north have already completed a similar Bureau of Reclamation study called the Coconino Plateau Study. After we complete our study (in two years), we need to combine the results of both studies and take the next step. That is a Bureau of Reclamation Feasibility Study and that requires congressional approval and funding. That study would take several years, but if it were successful, we would have a clear path to a sustainable alternative water supply.
Posted: Saturday, November 28, 2009
Article comment by:
L Morocco
And yet they continue to actively seek more growth.....The "Grow or Die" mantra needs to be changed to "Grow and Die."
Posted: Saturday, November 28, 2009
Article comment by:
John Zambrano
For Clarity:
The shortages were calculated by subtracting the available water from the projected demand. The projected demands are based on estimates of future population and water consumption rates. The available waters are the amount of natural recharge minus the current natural outflow. In effect, the available water is calculated based on no further reduction in the aquifer levels. If we are willing to let the aquifer water levels drop farther, more water would be available at the expense of natural outflow and eventually at the existence of the aquifer itself. These numbers can be verified by reviewing the PowerPoint referenced at the beginning of the article.
Posted: Saturday, November 28, 2009
Article comment by:
Yukon Jack
It seems to me that part of the solution is obvious: severely limit growth unless we can import water from elsewhere. Elsewhere is NOT the local aquafers. It's wrong in my opinion to take water from under the unincorporated areas to supply the larger cities unless you can do so without affecting the supply of those that live over it.
Unfortunately Mark Twain was right when he said, “Whiskey's for drinking, water's for fighting about.” We need to tell the developers NOW that there is not going to be the expansion that they want in the future. If we don't and let them proceed with their planning we're lying to both them and us. Let's quash the "fight" now!
Posted: Saturday, November 28, 2009
Article comment by:
When?
And now Prescott is set to annex another 1,900 acres. Isn't it wonderful that our politicians are looking our for the little guy? This is more acres than both the Cavan and Fann annexations. Where is the water going to come from? I guarantee the Verde will be running dry by then at this rate.
When do we get some responsible government?
Posted: Saturday, November 28, 2009
Article comment by:
average rather than add
It is not legitimate to add the acre-feet per year shortages in the manner done in this article. Otherwise, one could say that homes on block A have a 7000 acfy shortage, and homes on the next block over have a 7100 acfy shortage ---so those 2 blocks have a 14100 acfy shortage. A more appropriate description would be to average; those two blocks have an average shortage of 7050 acfy.
Posted: Saturday, November 28, 2009
Article comment by:
Patriot
Stop development now, the developers need to be removed from our society any way possible.
We cannot support any more developments. Slow controlled growth is the only answer.
Posted: Saturday, November 28, 2009
Article comment by:
Jeff
This is easy! Just stop all the projected growth now! This area can't handle 200,000 more people! Wake up dreamers!
Posted: Saturday, November 28, 2009
Article comment by:
Clarity
This is where the rubber meets the road. All the lies and BS cannot evade this study. True, the exact details may be somewhat off, and no one knows with exact certainty what the future holds, but the trends therein are forecast based upon best estimates and past occurrences. The Southwest, Arizona, and Yavapai county and its municipalities WILL suffer water shortages at some point in the future. Developers, politicians, and officials who push policies which further additional population growth are acting in essence immorally, for they must know the negative heritage they are leaving the next generation in payment of their immediate profits. Greed is the greatest sin for it feeds all other transgressions.
Posted: Saturday, November 28, 2009
Article comment by:
No name provided
Could somebody else clarify what I had a hard time discerning from this article?: does the projected 2050 annual "shortage" amount equal the estimated current annual amount used? In other words, there will be NO water for the Prescott area by then? Is that what this study is saying?
