12/30/2008 10:57:00 PM Talk of the Town: CWAG ignores the rest of the story
By JACK WILSON Special to the Courier
A recent "Talk of the Town" by John Zambrano, Vice President of Citizens Water Advocacy Group (CWAG), tried to convince us that Prescott and Prescott Valley wear black hats as the bad guys in this scenario.
That just is not true.
The Arizona Legislature in 1991 made provisions (A.R.S. §45-555E) for Prescott to import water from the Big Chino Basin. Valley cities got Central Arizona Project (CAP) water, but it was not feasible to pump CAP water uphill over 100 miles, so this was an accommodation.
Zambrano would have you believe we have been cavalier in our approach to importing water from the Big Chino, and do not care about the impact on the Verde River. That just is not true.
What has Prescott done to mitigate future potential, though yet unproven, effects from our proposed pumping? Several important things.
First, the original purchase of the Big Chino Water Ranch included a 6,000-acre conservation easement on the JWK ranch. With the 4,500 acres on the city-owned Big Chino Water Ranch, the total conservation easement ensures, conservatively, 10,000-acres can never be developed, stopping as many as 5,000 new exempt wells (one per 2-acre parcel) which otherwise could result.
While other organizations were advocating the use of conservation easements to protect the Verde River, the City of Prescott secured this conservation easement as part of its mitigation strategy. Conservation easements are not free, usually valued at one-half the underlying land cost. Strangely, CWAG did not recognize this mitigation measure by the municipalities.
Second, the Big Chino Water Ranch contained Historical Irrigated Acres (HIA). The Prescott City Council formally has designated that it will use these HIA for either achieving safe yield or mitigation - equivalent to a reduction 3,300 acre-feet of annual groundwater consumption. Again, CWAG did not recognize this mitigation measure by the municipalities.
Third, we hired professionals to model the groundwater basin underlying the Big Chino Water Ranch. This modeling was submitted to the Arizona Department of Water Resources in support of our application for modification of Prescott's Designation of Assured Water Supply. This modeling focused on the Big Chino Water Ranch and impacts likely to result from our proposed pumping. It was more precise than previous modeling of much larger areas by the U. S. Geological Survey (USGS). Strangely, CWAG did not acknowledge the benefit of this work as yet another mitigation measure of the municipalities.
Fourth, at significant cost we have installed monitoring wells at strategic points on the Big Chino Water Ranch to monitor any changes in the groundwater table.
The Big Chino Basin is a vast land area, and any real solution to mitigation needs to resolve basin-wide issues. When you take a basin-wide perspective, it becomes apparent that the proposed pumping on the Big Chino Water Ranch is not the biggest potential problem.
Exempt wells are a greater threat to the water table - with or without the Big Chino Project the potential for thousands of new exempt wells exists in the Big Chino. Intense future development on large ranches remains a greater threat.
Prescott and Prescott Valley have exercised diligent stewardship in our attempts to develop mitigation strategies. However, we need a basin-wide approach to answer the larger threats from exempt wells and large-scale development. One vehicle for a basin-wide approach would be a Special Water District as defined under Section 48 of the Arizona Revised Statutes (would require State Legislature authorization). When Chino Valley, Prescott Valley and Prescott were discussing potential agreements with the Salt River Project (SRP), we discussed this under the topic of "Items of Common Interest."
Also, Yavapai County, the Yavapai-Prescott Indian Tribe, Dewey-Humboldt, Chino Valley, Prescott Valley and Prescott formed the Upper Verde River Protection Coalition that is proactively working on additional mitigation strategies.
Sadly, CWAG has a myopic view focused only on Prescott and Prescott Valley. It is easy to make flippant remarks such as "municipalities ignore water issues." It is much harder to work on the real issues of mitigation. CWAG has publicly stated we do not need to build the Big Chino Water Ranch pipeline now. Given this latest "Talk of the Town," it is apparent CWAG never wants the pipeline built.
Conversely, Prescott Valley and Prescott continue to work on water importation from the Big Chino to ensure our viability into the future. Our citizens will decide who is wearing the black hat, the municipalities or CWAG.
Jack D. Wilson is mayor of Prescott.
Reader Comments
Posted: Sunday, January 04, 2009
Article comment by:
Chuck Bordenave
If common sense development prevailed, instead of GREED, there would not be a water problem, and NO need for this 200 million dollar DISASTER. Average Joe, You sound like a paid consultant or a LAPDOG.
Posted: Friday, January 02, 2009
Article comment by:
Gary Beverly
Gary Worob: A local citizens group, Citizens Water Advisory Group (CWAG) has done exactly what you are suggesting. Go to http://www.cwagaz.org/reports.html and read all those reports! Facts galore! We are debating from facts (we are not backstabbing) and it all points to the inescapable conclusion that the Tri-cities are operating in a severe water deficit now, that this problem will worsen due to climate change, that population growth will continue to exacerbate the problem, and that pumping the Big Chino will eventually destroy the Upper Verde River. Did you know that ADOT is planning for 1.3 MILLION population (that's Tucson!) between Seligman and Dewey by 2050 without considering our current water resource problems? Our elected leaders need to get realistic about population and resources. Our water usage and urban planning needs drastic, immediate change.
Posted: Friday, January 02, 2009
Article comment by:
gary ian worob
am i missing something: i still believe that the only dumb question is one that is not asked. so here is my question: i have not seen anywhere the mention of a hydrological study involving a draw down test of the area to give facts as to how much water is available and how it would affect the area. perhaps i missed this along the way with the myriad of battle preparations but to me this is the key. i was vitally involved in similar battle in ohio and i brought in a grant to hire an "outside the area'' expert who was not biased to perform the testing and he brought in a well driller who was not from anywhere near the area and was totally unbiased.
the results showed that the damage to the immediate residential area and the surrounding areas, in the long run, would have been catastrophic. we dealt with facts. we left personal feelings and economic fantasies out of the picture and just dealt with facts. we did the same thing in florida and found tremendous results using scientific methods rather than hearesay or speculation. so, am i missing something here or is something missing... keep up the fighting and backstabbing if you like...but i prefer facts. i already have seen the results of inappropriate well drilling. i have seen people lose their own wells and water supplies and communities almost devastated by greed. i am not opposed to safe yield by any means, but i am totally supportive of facts. they don't lie. happy new year!
Posted: Friday, January 02, 2009
Article comment by:
Vigilance is More Important Than Ever
Good citizens of Yavapai County and the City of Prescott and Towns of Prescott Valley and Chino Valley, please actively support candidates to replace the present officeholders who mostly represent the big-money vested interests. They are not looking out for your long-term welfare, but for the profits of developers and big contractors.
Posted: Thursday, January 01, 2009
Article comment by:
No name provided
Mayor Wilson, why don't you use the water you intend to take and hook all of us on exempt wells up to the pipeline, I Would gladly cap my well. I for one am tired of all the whining. What do you think will happen when you pump, and run all of our wells dry?
Posted: Thursday, January 01, 2009
Article comment by:
Mr. Mayor Get Realistic
First, Prescott created conservation easements to prevent Paulden property owners from putting 5,000 homes on 2 ac. parcels. Now, instead the City can use the water they are "conserving" for 50,000 homes on postage stamp size lots. Second, the city has 3,000 ac. feet of HIA water they won't pump. So instead of pumping 11,000 ac. feet, they will only pump 8,000 ac. feet. Third the city hired their very own engineers to tell them what they want to hear and they are sooo much smarter than the USGS scientists that have no personal stake in the water war. Fourth, the city has installed monitoring wells to watch the water levels decline. None of the Mayor's points indicate the creation of any real mitigation plan. Real mitigation would have provisions to immediately stop pumping if water levels decline and to switch to an alternate source of water if aquifer levels start declining. We all know that is absolutely not a part of the plan. The cities will never stop pumping once they start. The proof is in the pudding. They have already drawn down the Little Chino Aquifer. The Big Chino is next. Mayor Wilson states PV and Prescott are not the real threat. Its those pesky private wells. According to him, those private property owners in Paulden shouldn't be allowed to have any more water. Prescott and Prescott Valley need ALL the water, so they can add tens of thousands of rooftops and more big box stores to put the local little business owners out of business. Mr. Mayor, I think your citizens have decided who is wearing the black hat and it ain't the Verde River supporters OR the people of Paulden.
Posted: Thursday, January 01, 2009
Article comment by:
P.O.'d in Paulden
Dear Mr. Steele, I did vote against Ms. Springer, but as a retiree, I DON'T have any big dollar donations to give. What I DO have is my well that will be affected by the pipeline. I promise you that prior to the next election, I WILL work on behalf of any candidate(s) that will sustain my way of life. Happy New Year and thank you for being a voice of reason !
Posted: Thursday, January 01, 2009
Article comment by:
Tom Steele
Dear "PO'ed in Paulden", How hard did you work to elect Ms. Lockwood or Mr. Seaman to replace a developer hugging Ms. Springer? Until the good people West of Mingus can provide money and workers to elect representatives of "We the People" the current "Develop or Die" crowd will prevail. It takes "grit" and a lot of "scratch" to compete with people with the money to buy elections.
Posted: Wednesday, December 31, 2008
Article comment by:
average Joe
Chuck, I can't speak for the Mayor or anyone else, but the benefits of water into the future are self evident to the average Joe. Go without water for one full day and you too will become enlightened. The only unanswered question is if and when the River will be affected by the human consumption of life giving water. Asking why why we need water is silly. If it will make you feel better, I'm sure you'll never have to pay a dime for water if you don't want any.
Posted: Wednesday, December 31, 2008
Article comment by:
P.O.'d in Paulden
Mr. Steele and Mr. Seaman, please DO run for office next term, and stop this before it goes any further than it has ! You both sound like the type of men that have ALL the people's best interests at heart, not just the developers.
Posted: Wednesday, December 31, 2008
Article comment by:
Leslie Hoy
Mayor Wilson renewed his CWAG membership when he attended our December 13 annual meeting, however it's apparent that he either never understood our mission to promote "a sustainable water future in the Upper Verde River Basin and the Prescott Active Management Area by educating the public, encouraging citizen action, and advocating for responsible governmental decision-making" or in the interim two weeks, has decided not to support it. He seems also to have forgotten that CWAG has advocated a special water district for some time http://www.cwagaz.org/Bulletin4.pdf and has expressed in numerous forums the concern about overpumping in the Big Chino Subbasin by all the potential users, not just by Prescott and Prescott Valley. Before becoming Mayor, Wilson himself knew the examples of "mitigation" he sites were a smokescreen. "Instead of giving a politician the keys to the city, it might be better to change the locks." ~Doug Larson
Posted: Wednesday, December 31, 2008
Article comment by:
No name provided
Just because CWAG did not mention certain past actions by Prescott that showed concern about the river, does not negate the validity of John Zambrano's message, and does not justify such an attack by the Mayor on CWAG.
I agree with Mayor Wilson that Prescott is not the largest potential pumper of Big Chino Water and that a basin-wide approach is needed to protect the flow of the upper Verde River. He said this was discussed with SRP. Why not propose it publicly? Why don't the Councils of Prescott, Precott Valley and Chino Valley, as well as Yavapai County Supervisors, pass resolutions similar to:
"Most independent scientists agree projected pumping of the Big Chino will severely diminish the flow of the upper Verde River. We therefore request the State Legislature to work with us to initiate a Special Water Management District for the Big Chino Basin." SRP and CWAG will certainly support this type of solution.
Posted: Wednesday, December 31, 2008
Article comment by:
James Russell
While the Prescott Mayor redefines the word "mitigation" for us, I would like to ask a question: why are you risking 170 million of my tax dollars on a poker game where other players are already holding the winning hand? Hoping they will fold?
Posted: Wednesday, December 31, 2008
Article comment by:
Publius
AHH. Facts are stubborn things. Once again poor Jack must recant his campaign views when faced with reality. What an about face he makes when on his watch he discovers that past policies were in truth correct. All the self anointed groups like CWAG illusions notwithstanding the issue will resolve itself through proper action. Just think how much strife we could have avoided if only Jack had listened before he decided to run.
Posted: Wednesday, December 31, 2008
Article comment by:
Tom Steele
As just a member of CWAG for 4 years, I have enjoyed the knowledge imparted by Dr. Ed Wolfe, John Zambrano and many other trained people who attempt to educate the public and to error on the side of protection of our precious,life giving, water resources. Remember, it was the rancher-developers including Bill Fain who aquired the exemption and legislation from the state legislature for importing water from outside the Prescott Active Management Area (PAMA). Does Prescott, Prescott Valley and Chino Valley wear black hats on this issue? Well, I'd say they are certainy NOT white hat people. Together, they all rejected the Verde River Basin Partnership promoted by Senator McCain since they could not control it's rulings. Despite the fact it's rulings would not be law over their municipalities; they collectively rejected being a part of the conservative group. As a Prescott Valley council member and the only elected person in PV or Prescott to vote against the IGA for Prescott to build the pipeline, I am proud of my vote "NO". I voted "NO" for one reason. The agreement did not include a legal requirement to replentish our ground water and therefor, all water could be used for future development. Was I the only one who read the agreement or was I the only one not controlled by the desire to please the developers?
Posted: Wednesday, December 31, 2008
Article comment by:
Mishyn Acomplishd
If you are such fine stewards, why do you keep lying to us about a magical "clay plug"? People on the up and up generally don't have to lie to sell their ideas.
Posted: Wednesday, December 31, 2008
Article comment by:
John told it like it is
What, is that you, "one-term" Jack?
Posted: Wednesday, December 31, 2008
Article comment by:
George Seaman
If Mayor Wilson had attended the City of Prescott's organized mitigation meetings a few years ago he would know that none of the stakeholders (including the City of Prescott) think that any of the items he describes in this Talk of the Town are "mitigation". He would also know that until the lawyers told the city to shut down these talks even the city admitted that a mitigation plan was needed for this project. While it makes sense to say that Prescott has done some things to indicate they are concerned about the flow of the river, they have not come up with even one item that should be considered viable mitigation, the fact that the council considered HIA water to be used for either safe yield OR mitigation means they think there is a potential need for it there, but their vague language allows the city to claim that such water will be used for whichever use it sounds best to use on (and they change their tune weekly). Mr Wilson ran a campaign with much support from individuals who were members of CWAG, during that campaign he seemed to make it clear that he understood what mitigation meant, and he acknowledged the statements about the stakeholders meetings that I mentioned before. It is clear he has decided to break his promises to his supporters, and not offer a significant explanation as to why. His actions have indicated that he wants to force the city into a long string of lawsuits that may or may not turn out well for the city. Over and over again representatives from agencies that have a legal interest in the outcome of this project have come to the city and been very clear on how the city could avoid litigation and over and over again these people have been ignored. The most important reason to do a Habitat Conservation Plan and a viable mitigation plan for this project is to PREVENT lawsuits! It will cost the cities less money to come up with real solutions than it will cost to defend these ignorant unscientific statements that Mayor Wilson has caste his lot with ever since his swearing in. So I will say it again very simply, regardless of whether the city thinks it needs to do a mitigation plan for the sake of the river, it needs to do one for the sake of the city. If there was any doubt in anyone's mind up until now, Mr. Wilson has just commited political suicide, he is certainly a one term wonder who has abandoned the principles which he ran on in the last election. Jack, do yourself and all of the people of Prescott a favor and choose not to run in November And just for the sake of clarity I am not running for office next year.
Posted: Wednesday, December 31, 2008
Article comment by:
Chuck Bordenave
Mr.Mayors, Wilson and Skoog, Please enlighten the public, the average JOE, what are the benefits of this pipeline to us the taxpayers you want to foot the bill? Please dont have Tarkowski, or Legler write your talking points.
