9/4/2009 10:00:00 PM Talk of the Town: SRP really wants all our water
By MALCOLM W. BARRETT JR. Special to the Courier
As a 28-year resident, former Prescott City Council member and active community participant in Central Arizona for many years, I know first-hand the importance of planning for the future, particularly in a tough economy.
I am closely following the legal battle for water in the Prescott area, and frankly, I am disturbed by the tactics Salt River Project (SRP) is employing to stop the Big Chino Water Ranch pipeline project.
The project will allow the City of Prescott and Town of Prescott Valley to pump about 8,000 acre-feet of groundwater from the Big Chino Sub-basin aquifer northwest of Paulden as legally permitted under Arizona law. The aquifer holds a total of about 6.8 million acre-feet of water. SRP currently is mounting legal challenges to the constitutionality of the law that allows for this important project.
I was on the Prescott City Council in 1994, when Prescott decided to sell its 7,200-acre-foot CAP allocation in exchange for rights to the Big Chino Water Ranch supply. The deal made perfect sense: building a pipeline from the Colorado River was not and still is not feasible or cost-effective for Prescott taxpayers. SRP supported the deal at the time and mounted no challenges to the law for nearly 18 years.
In its attempt to stop Prescott and Prescott Valley from moving forward, SRP is dangerously close to setting legal precedents that could affect groundwater
users' rights across the state. SRP's expansive view of surface water rights, as well as its solicitation of federal involvement in the management of the state's water resources, deserves scrutiny by anyone with an interest in the future of rural Arizona.
SRP contends that its surface water rights on the Verde River include groundwater from the Big Chino aquifer that users pump from a well field more than 20 miles away from the headwaters of the Upper Verde River. To say, as SRP repeatedly does, that this groundwater constitutes a significant portion of its downstream Verde River water rights, is misleading at best.
Indeed, almost every rural Arizona water supply source lies within 20 miles of a surface water source. If the courts put a 20-mile pumping exclusion zone in effect statewide, essentially no wells would be off limits to SRP control.
Further complicating matters is SRP's attempt to "federalize" local water management. In a recent Arizona Department of Water Resources (ADWR) administrative hearing, SRP argued that the mere potential for harm to an endangered or threatened species required ADWR to deny Prescott's application to pump Big Chino groundwater, even though SRP's federal witness testified that the government has not listed any Endangered Species Act (ESA) along the Upper Verde River for more than a decade.
SRP's efforts are surely a means to mire the legal process down further, and its consequences could be disastrous for Prescott and surrounding communities. Water management in rural Arizona has been, and should continue to be, a regional effort with ADWR's oversight and cooperation. To impose unnecessary federal ESA oversight on local groundwater management efforts would erode property rights and cede rural Arizona's decision-making to Phoenix and Washington, D.C.
Now comes the news that SRP is opening an office in downtown Prescott. It is laying off people and hiking service rates in Phoenix, but it has the resources to open an office in an area in which it serves no customers?
It is extremely important for Prescott area residents to understand the issues at stake here, and the potential results of SRP's game of legal hardball. The future of our way of life for our families could very well be at stake.
The bottom line is that the groundwater in the Big Chino is not SRP's water. It's our water, and SRP's tactics could take this water out of the public's hands and into their exclusive control.
Malcolm W. Barrett Jr. is a former Prescott City Council member, a local businessman and active in civic affairs.
Reader Comments
Posted: Sunday, September 06, 2009
Article comment by:
Verde River Citizens Alliance
"SRP contends that its surface water rights on the Verde River include groundwater from the Big Chino aquifer that users pump from a well field more than 20 miles away from the headwaters of the Upper Verde River. To say, as SRP repeatedly does, that this groundwater constitutes a significant portion of its downstream Verde River water rights, is misleading at best." I suggest you see what noted hydro-geologists have to say:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XhB_jOdw2hw
Posted: Sunday, September 06, 2009
Article comment by:
Did YOU get to Vote on the Chino Pipeline?
Its simple: WATER = MILLIONS for the Land owners and Developers. They already own the local governments and planning and zoning boards. P.V. is active in lobbying Washington for the Big Chino Pipeline and spend its taxpayers dollars ahnd over fist! The main thrust is "Develop or Die" an erroneous lie they push ... Remember they can't move the land! Where is the U.S. Dept of Justice in all of this? ArmyVet
Posted: Sunday, September 06, 2009
Article comment by:
Old News
John Zambrano and CWAG have already presented an alternative to the pipeline but that does not fit the grow, grow, grow mantra of the real estate/rancher network. The Chino water is all about more sprawl, and not at all about safe yield.
Posted: Sunday, September 06, 2009
Article comment by:
Water Girl
Mr. Barrett, You desire to frame this water battle as a David and Goliath story. I see it as a Goliath vs. Goliath. There are no "saints" in this battle over water. Local management of our for-how-long "rural" water use under ADWR is not necessarily going to be any better. SRP may be the big bad wolf huffing and puffing now, but I don't see Prescott and PV doing any better with the BC pipeline. I see no protection or guarantees in place for rural well owners if this pipeline pumping starts to impact their well levels. In fact BCR project manager Mr. Holt was asked by a Paulden well owner, "What will Prescott do if my well drops after the pipeline starts up?" He confidently stated in so many words this person couldn't definitvely prove that the pipeline is the cause. He went on to suggest other reasons or a combination of factors, but failed to sum it up in a nut shell that Mr. Well Owner is up a creek with no airtight legally provable recourse. So much for caring about rural property owners!
There already IS a recognized connection between surface water and groundwater. Other states have acknowledged this and have acted responsibly to insure the quality of life for this precious life-giving common using integrated or unified management plans when it comes to groundwater and surface water. See http://www.ucowr.siu.edu/updates/pdf/V106_A2.pdf for a report on this issue. Instead of pointing fingers, what will Prescott do to mitigate this issue? The future way of life for rural families living in Arizona have received no assurances in the event of possible unintended consequences from pumping. If you really cared (LOL), that's where your energies should be focus, Mr. Barrett.
Legally Prescott can pump, but morally I challenge our officials to take the high road for the benefit of all current property owners. What we decide today will determine our regions and states legacy and be the ultimate measure of true leadership. We must see legislative action to create a unified groundwater and surface water management system now!
Posted: Sunday, September 06, 2009
Article comment by:
Malcolm Barrett Jr
To We're Still Thirsty: "it's just over the hill in Lake Pleasant"? You need to recalculate your mileage, and consider the cost of a pipeline through the Bradshaws, much less having to pump a mile up hill, even if we could have obtained the rights.
Posted: Saturday, September 05, 2009
Article comment by:
Hey TPI - what's your alternative?
Why does SRP need to hire employees when they've got unpaid volunteers right here doing their dirty work. I'm referring to the backers of the so-call Taxpayer Protection Initiative which is the first step among the local anti-pipeline folks to get the Big Chino pipeline killed permanently. Of course, they never have an alternative plan for us to reach safe yield if we can't tap the Big Chino.
Posted: Saturday, September 05, 2009
Article comment by:
Leslie Hoy
To Mr. Barrett, Mr. Adab, and everyone else who is trying to make SRP the enemy to serve your own selfish purposes: SRP is not the problem. Here are some questions for you to ponder: Does Prescott have the moral right to damage the last perennially flowing river in Arizona? What about the rights of the people who use the river for recreation, to generate tourism dollars, etc.? Where is any sort of plan for mitigation of the pumping? Can the relatively small populations of Prescott and Prescott Valley afford the cost of the pipeline? How will it be paid for? Do the citizens really want to give up control of their water system to a private company? Should the citizens continue to pay for endless litigation with little hope of winning? If the cities and the developers would provide satisfactory answers to these questions rather than using tax dollars to hire a P.R. firm to sell us the pipeline, we might come closer to finding a sustainable solution for our future water needs.
Posted: Saturday, September 05, 2009
Article comment by:
No name provided
IN order to maintain a reasonal quality of life in this area there has to be a cap on water and population growth.
Posted: Saturday, September 05, 2009
Article comment by:
Al Adab
Many thanks to Mr. Barrett for pointing out what should be obvious to all by now. SRP is more interested in keeping Tempe town lake and a half million swimming pools in Phoenix filled than it is is Prescott's water supply. Prescott has a statutory right to Big Chino water by legislative action. Prescott is the only entity in the AMA with an import right. All others must rely on Little Chino withdrawls and must meet safe yield by the mandate. Prescott cam meet that mandate through its import right. Purchase of the water ranch retires current use and allows for that same use to transfer to the City of Prescott. Close one straw open another. Prescott also owns a fine well closer to the town also available for water import. The proposed pipeline is nothing more than the attainment of the water we already own. Attempts by local citizens to prevent water import are ill advised and simply play into the hands of SRP and the insatiable demands of Maricopa County.
Posted: Saturday, September 05, 2009
Article comment by:
P.O.'d in Paulden
No Mr. Barrett, it's not YOUR water, it's OUR water, the property owners of Paulden, that depend on their wells for survival ! I welcome Salt River Project's intercession, and pray that they will prevail. Bottom line is, you don't need the water to exist, you just want it for future development, but we need it to maintain our lives. Just keep electing like-minded people and S.R.P. will bleed you dry with legal costs.
Posted: Saturday, September 05, 2009
Article comment by:
Tom Steele
Mr. Barrett is correct as far as he goes. However, he does not touch the science of ground water to stream flow. The removal of 8,000 acre feet of water per year, mainly in the hot summer months, will eventually lower the water table and within a few years, lower the flow of the Verde River even though it is 20 miles away. How about the wells dropping in the Paulden area between the Big Chino well field and the Verde River? Mr. Barrett needs to ask himself why the Big Chino Pipeline people will not develop a mitigation plan with the Paulden Area Homeowners and the Verde River Basin people. A plan to legally protect the flow of the Verde River would also satisfy the Salt River Project (SRP)people. I think the Pipeline People KNOW that if they can get the water flowing without mitigation and proceed to build 30,000 new homes in Prescott and Prescott Valley, the 90,000 new peoples need for water will over ride the needs of the habitat of the Verde and any demands of the SRP.
Posted: Saturday, September 05, 2009
Article comment by:
Talking won't do
Let's face it. This issue will be decided in court. No amount of Courier editorials and Talks of the Town will alter that fact. Strap on your legal boots, Prescott, you can't just talk your way out of this fight. Talk is cheap; lawsuits aren't.
Posted: Saturday, September 05, 2009
Article comment by:
The Verde River Network
The water our cities want from Big Chino will only go to new development in the form of cheap tract homes built by out of state firms. Anyone who has lived in one of these developments can attest to their quality. Not one drop will help the locals who are already here. Anyone who says otherwise stands to make a killing from this land grab, at the expense of one of the last free flowing rivers in the west, and turn our mountain towns into a clone of Goodyear or Chandler. SRP is only defending its historic water rights. Don't believe the land barons, they are only on the side of Big Stucco.
Posted: Saturday, September 05, 2009
Article comment by:
It is actually the Verde River's water we are planning to pump. The first ~23 miles of the river receive its flow from the springs at the "bottom" of the Big Chino aquifer. Lowering the water table by pumping will cause the river to eventually run dry. Even Herb Guenther (head of the Arizona Department of Water Resources) has publicly stated this to be true. Herb agrees with the USGS peer reviewed scientific documents. “The river will run dry.” The reason for this huge 200M+ USD pipeline investment is to increase the value of land to be annexed into the COP and PV city limits so that huge developments can draw in many tens of thousands of more folks. We will look and feel like Phoenix, LA, all those places where we do not want to live. Malcom’s vision.... Developers will get very rich, a greatly ballooned population still will still not have a sustainable water supply, and the Upper Verde River habitat is destroyed. I personally think that there is no merit in his vision.
Posted: Saturday, September 05, 2009
Article comment by:
We're still thirsty
Not to argue the point that Mr. Barrett and others gave away Prescott's CAP water in exchange for this very costly Big Chino exercise, but the fact is the CAP water wouldn't have to be piped from the Colorado River; it's just over the hill in Lake Pleasant, and building a pipeline from there to Prescott would probably be chicken feed compared to the investment in Big Chino, if it ever becomes a reality. And if it doesn't, then what? The CAP water is still lost to the citizens of Prescott.
