The Good, The Bad, The Ugly of Water Wars

There ain't much water in the desert, by definition.  What little there is, its use is plagued with confusion and mistrust.  Let's take a look at some of these . . . 

1. The Good: Everyone in Arizona currently has sufficient water to care for yards, cars, and swimming pools.  They may not in the future but, what the hell, the future is uncertain.

2. The Bad: A piece in the Verde Independent recently characterized the relationship between several northern Arizona communities over a decade long study by the U S Geological Survey groundwater model as "evolving", filled with the confusing terms of "collaboration", "acrimony", and the unwillingness of various parties of the Water Advisory Committee to meet in something other than a hostile environment.

3. The Ugly:  Local rancher, Andy Groseta, has created a gravel diversion dam across the Verde River blocking nearly 99% of the river's flow.  Why? Because he can under "first rights" fill his ditch system and because there's a buck to be made.  It's called greed . . . at least in some circles and, in others, called stupid.  The river always wins!

2011 version of Cottonwood Diversion Dam

2013 version of Cottonwood Diversion Dam. Photo: Bill Regner.

Where Water Meets Sun

This photo of a remarkable project in India was recently sent to me by Richard M. Hileman, a Facebook friend who obtained it from Occupy Wall St. It came with his comment, "This would be good for Arizona."

This solar panel laid on the vast stretches of agricultural channels 

in Gujarat India generates 1 Megawatt of electricity per km and 

prevents evaporation of 1 crore (10,000,000) liters of water 

every year.

While it might prove impractical for the mountainous regions of northern Arizona, it would seem a workable solution for clean power generation and water distribution in the southern part of the state which has higher proportion of largely flat land.

The concept would particularly suit irrigation projects and diversion canals which are already level and suffer high levels of water loss due to evaporation.

Selling the Verde River, Part 2

It seems that any thoughts expressed about the Arizona ditch system that draws water from the Verde River generates a variety of knee-jerk reactions that are inaccurate or irrelevant.

The point made in the previous post was that the design of the diversion dam on the Verde River may be pushing more water through the Cottonwood Ditch than it is entitled to take.

I did not (1.) condemn the ditch system nor did I (2.) disparage the 300+ users of Cottonwood Ditch water.  Although certainly possible, I did not (3.) question the environmental impact of the diversion dam.

Google Earth Image taken June 13, 2011, showing the Cottonwood Ditch Assoc. diversion dam.  Nearly 100% of the Verde River is blocked, diverting most of the river’s flow not along its natural course but to the Cottonwood Ditch. Various springs and seeps restore the river’s flow about 1,000 yds. downstream.

Others have concerns, as well. 

Doug Van Gausig, Mayor of Clarkdale, entered comments into the minutes of the town council meeting of June 2007 regarding Mr. Grosetas activity.

"This summer the Cottonwood Ditch is again diverting 100% of the Verde River into their ditch, allowing only a trickle to bypass the diversion. This is a terrible thing for the river's habitat. It means that the river is no longer a viable corridor for transportation and migration of aquatic animals - the diversion becomes, in essence, an unnatural barrier to movements in the river. I talked to Greg Kornrumph, of SRP, and to Max Castillo and Les Bovee of State Parks (which operates the Hickey Ditch) about possible remedies for this situation. I'll continue to work on this issue with State Parks, FreeportMcMoRan and Cottonwood Ditch to find an equitable, legal and durable solution to this annual problem."

A suggestion made by Mr. Groseta is that “interested citizens and political leaders consider the adverse impact . . . trees and vegetation are causing to our river system. These millions of trees are sucking the river dry!", he asserts. 

If this is the case, it’s surprising he has let trees and vegetation line the first mile or so of the Cottonwood Ditch.  (He is President, remember!!!)

As the photo indicates, the river's water has disappeared because of the dam, not because of surrounding trees and vegetation.

Mr. Groseta's myopia may stem from all the trees that block his view of the forest.

The question should not be my qualifications but Andy Groseta's take from the river.  It affects everyone.


NOTES: 
1. I debated whether to continue the subject of this blog in the Verde Independent.  A newspaper is not the format for on-going discussions of a subject.

2. Some respondents to my previous blog should learn the difference between insinuation and inference.  I don't insinuate anything, but I can't control reader inferences.

How to Sell the Verde River.

Andy Groseta has again blocked the complete flow of the Verde River.  He's entitled to do it...Arizona law says so.  The law also says he is entitled to take 10.6 cubic-feet-per-second from the river for the Cottonwood Ditch Association, an organization he heads up.

Note the increased level of the Verde River upstream from the dam and note
the curved configuration. That's important because it increases the flow rate of
water through the sluice gate that is a primitive way of measuring his
"take" ...which he sells.

His water-take is determined by a simple sluice gate.  The flow through that sluice gate, however, is determined by the pressure of the river, whether the river is "high" or "low".

Note the level of the Verde behind the dam.  It's 8 -10 feet higher than downstream.

The primitive measuring systems in use do not calculate river back-up, water pressure and subsequent flow.  

It's not the diversion dam that's at issue.  The issue is whether the design of the diversion dam increases his "take" beyond his entitlement.

Has anyone measured Groseta’s take from the river?

My neighbor has a sign that proclaims, “The River Always Wins.”

We’ll see.  The Verde may need some $$$s of its own.

When the River Becomes a Swamp -- Part 1

Guide books refer to the Verde River as one of the last free flowing, perennial streams in Arizona.

Maybe it was free flowing years ago, but not today.

There are many causes--drought, lack of snow pack, depleted aquifer--but foremost is the Cottonwood Ditch Association in Cottonwood, Arizona.

The Cottonwood Ditch Association (CDA) constructs "diversion" dams across the river, channeling the river's flow into irrigation ditches that serve the interests of a few hay and alfalfa farmers...local suppliers to cattle ranchers and horsemen. Often these groups are one and the same.

The one who manages these operations is Andy Groseta, President of the CDA, on one hand, and chairman of the National Cattlemens Beef Association Policy Division, on the other.

While visibility of this issue has been minimal and controversy nonexistent, it has raised interest (and possibly the hackles) of at least one adjoining community.

Speaking to City Council on June 12, 2007, Clarkdale Mayor Doug Von Gausig remarked, "...I think it's important to know what's going on with this issue. I met with Andy Groseta, ditch boss of the Cottonwood Ditch Association. This summer the

Cottonwood Ditch is again diverting 100% of the Verde River into their ditch, allowing only a trickle to bypass the diversion. This is a terrible thing for the river's habitat. It means that the river is no longer a viable corridor for transportation and migration of aquatic animals - the diversion becomes, in essence, an unnatural barrier to movements in the river."

That was June, 2007.

Fast forward to August, 2009...and...nothing has changed. On my last trip to the Verde the flow of the river was virtually stopped and, again, 100% of the flow was diverted to the ditch system.

The effect on the river has been dramatic: the river had been changed to a slough, the flow was nonexistent, willow variants had

grown 15 ft high and 20 ft out from the banks, cattails were growing mid-stream and thick clumps of algae had formed in open areas.

Coming from the Midwest, adjacent to lakes Michigan and Erie, it's hard to imagine that one man/organization can control what is ostensibly a public body of water.

The irony in this case is that he's working at cross purposes with the City of Cottonwood (where he lives) and is at odds with the interests he represents. The river, as he knows it, will likely disappear depriving him of his irrigation source.

Additionally, in May of this year, the city paid a consulting firm, ESI Corp., to come up with a Strategic Economic Development Plan, Focus on Success.

The Plan cited the Verde River as one of the assets the town ought to promote:

"The first strategy is to develop river access points and multi-use trails leading from Old Town and other areas in town to the river. This will increase connectivity between the river and amenities in Old Town Cottonwood, and will thus encourage additional tourists to visit one of the main attractions in the City: the Verde River."

But...

What happens when the River becomes a swamp?

What happens when that swamp serves as a breeding ground for mosquitos?

What happens when tourists carry home various illnesses as souveniers of their trip?

What happens when the river will no longer supply the irrigation interests of a few land owners?

Andy Groseta and the Cottonwood Ditch Association is working counter to its own interests. They will find this out when the River has chosen some new options or has found another way around the Ditch Association.