By Mary Alice Murphy
American Rivers named the Gila River No. 4 among America's Most Endangered Rivers of 2014, according to an article in the Albuquerque Journal and a news release from the Gila Conservation Coalition, which forwarded the article to the Beat.
The quotes are from the article; the corrections are reporting the facts and clarifying points, and comments and an opinion are added.
"...shining a spotlight on the threat that an expensive and unnecessary pipeline and diversion project poses to New Mexico's last free-flowing river."
First correction:
No decision has been made to put in an 'expensive and unnecessary pipeline and diversion project'. The proposal is only one of 15 proposals being studied, evaluated and considered.
Second correction:
The Gila River is not a free-flowing river. It has numerous diversions above the Gila Wilderness, as well as Gila Valley ditches that regularly divert water, a major diversion that sends water to Bill Evans Lake, and additional farming and ranching diversions at Redrock and in the Virden Valley. These are within the state of New Mexico.
"Under a provision of the Arizona Water Settlements Act, construction of a large diversion project is planned on the Gila River that would capture an average of 14,000 acre-feet of water annually, or double the current withdrawals, to increase crop production and urbanization."
Third correction:
No large diversion project is planned. Three smaller diversion projects have been proposed—a big difference from planned. The Arizona Water Settlements Act allocates up to an annual average 14,000 acre-feet of water to the four counties of southwest New Mexico—Catron, Grant, Hidalgo and Luna. The amount of 10,000 acre-feet is allocated to the Gila River Basin, with 4,000 acre-feet allocated to the San Francisco River Basin.
The 14,000 acre-feet for the two basins is an annual average, and in some years, none to very little water could be captured and stored, because of the requirements and parameters of the Consumptive Use and Forbearance Act, which is part of the AWSA.
Fourth correction:
If a diversion and storage site were to be developed, it would allow water for higher-value crops, and would likely prevent urbanization of the farming and ranching areas of the four counties, but could provide water to the area's small municipalities.
"Expert analysis has shown that the ISC's proposal is fatally flawed and will not work as currently conceived," said Allyson Siwik, Executive Director of the Gila Conservation Coalition."
Fifth correction:
One expert, Norm Gaume, who was a former Interstate Stream Commission director, at a hearing for Senate Bill 89, which failed to pass out of committee, alleged one of the proposals, which has been studied, was fatally flawed. Other engineers and experts disagreed with his evaluation, and said some of the issues he mentioned could be addressed.
"The good news is that southwestern New Mexico's future water needs can be met through non-diversion conservation alternatives," Siwik continued.
Sixth correction:
According to estimates for present and future water needs, conservation alternatives would help alleviate the water shortages, but would not fulfill the deficits in needs and demands for water.
"A diversion on the Gila would be devastating to New Mexico's natural heritage," said Beth Bardwell, Director of Freshwater Conservation for Audubon New Mexico.
Seventh correction:
The Gila River's natural heritage is deteriorating because of the drought. Having water in storage would allow release of water to keep the river wet and keep the natural heritage alive.
"What's at stake is the largest stretch of cottonwood-willow riparian forest remaining in New Mexico, one of the highest concentrations of breeding birds in North America, and a living river that supports outdoor recreation and tourism for rural communities," Bardwell said.
Eighth correction:
The cottonwood trees are rapidly dying all along the Gila River. Doesn't the Rio Grande have long stretches of cottonwoods?
An endangered species, the Southwest willow flycatcher, has grown in number every year in the past few years, due to riparian restoration by one of the ranchers along the river. His stretch of the river has the highest breeding population. The ranchers and farmers believe in restoring and keeping a healthy environment. Their livelihoods depend on it.
Ninth correction:
A dry Gila River, and it does go dry many years along stretches of the river, does not provide outdoor recreation. Some years, a person can barely get feet wet, except in certain areas. Will tourists visit a dry river? Probably not.
"Governor Martinez and the Interstate Stream Commission should do the right thing and reject the Gila diversion," said Jason Amaro, New Mexico Wildlife Federation board member.
First comment:
This is Amaro's opinion, not a fact. Many others believe storage of high water flows is the only way to save the river.
"We need to maintain and enhance the health of the Gila River, the foundation of hunting and fishing related opportunities in southwestern New Mexico," Amaro also said.
Second comment:
The best way to enhance the health of the Gila River is to keep it wet. Yes, the river is the foundation of hunting- and fishing-related activities in the area. When the river is dry, the only fishing opportunities are in pools, known to regular fisherman, where they can catch fish, usually the predatory ones. The endangered species of minnows cannot survive in a dry river. Deer and elk move to where they can find water, which is only in spots along the river or away from the river in ponds.
" By supporting conservation alternatives to diversion, New Mexico can satisfy its water needs while protecting the quality of this premier outdoor recreation destination and supporting local economies dependent upon river-related recreation."
See sixth and ninth corrections and second comment.
" When asked in a June 2013 poll which approach they would prefer to address the state's water situation, New Mexico residents overwhelmingly supported conservation-based alternatives to diversions," according to the Albuquerque Journal article.
First opinion:
No one this editor knows was contacted in this survey. So the question is: Who was surveyed and how was the question worded? Survey questions can easily lead the surveyed to check the answer the surveyor seeks, using a push-poll technique.
" Eighty-five percent of residents support using current water supplies more wisely, by continuing to conserve water, using new technology to help reduce wasted water, and increasing recycling of water," the article continues.
Second opinion:
Almost everyone, who understands water, whether a farmer, rancher, or resident of a town or city, would agree that water should be used wisely and without waste. The recycling of wastewater is ongoing in several communities in New Mexico. It can be used for irrigating parks and, if treatment is thorough, it can even be mixed with drinking water to extend the supply. But these efforts only extend the supply and do not meet the estimated present and future increased demands.
" A tributary to the Colorado River, the Gila originates in America's first designated wilderness area, the Gila Wilderness, and is rich in biological diversity and cultural history. The Gila River supports healthy riverside forests, cold water fisheries, and a remarkable abundance of wildlife. The river also provides significant economic value to the region with unparalleled opportunities for outdoor recreation, nature-based travel, and wilderness experience." Also from the article.
Third opinion:
Yes, it is a tributary of the Colorado River, begins in a wilderness area and ir rich in biological diversity and cultural history, except for the dying riverside forests and the wildlife, which has moved to more reliable water sources. Cultural history includes humans, and they should not be forgotten when deciding on which proposals would be most beneficial to them, the river and all its inhabitants.
Without water in the river, the outdoor recreation is limited, nature-based travelers will choose other areas, but yes, hikers can and do take advantage of the wilderness. However, from personal experience, not all the water sources on the map have water in them.
"The annual America's Most Endangered Rivers® report is a list of rivers at a crossroads, where key decisions in the coming months will determine the rivers' fates. Over the years, the report has helped spur many successes, including the removal of outdated dams, the protection of rivers with Wild and Scenic designations, and the prevention of harmful development and pollution.
Fourth opinion:
This editor believes the reason the Gila River is on the list is because a decision must be made by the end of 2014 on whether to use the water in New Mexico or let it continue to flow to Arizona.
Keeping the Gila River wet would prevent subdivision development and pollution, which would likely be the long-term expectation, as farmers and ranchers decide to develop their land as homesites, because there is no longer enough water to farm or ranch.
Fifth opinion:
If the Gila and San Francisco river basins do not develop the water for their use, it is quite likely the water will be purchased by larger cities, such as Las Cruces, which has a deficit in the amount of water coming through on the Rio Grande on its way to Texas from the Elephant Butte Dam. Most of us in the area do not want to see the water leave the four-county region.