CENTER FOR BIOLOGICAL DIVERSITY
BECAUSE LIFE IS GOOD

Protecting endangered species and wild places through
science, policy, education, and environmental law.


News Release: June 6, 2005
FOR INFO: Dr. Robin Silver, Center for Biological Diversity Board Chair, 602.246.4170

New Fort Huachuca data shows increased peril to San Pedro

Fort Huachuca/Sierra Vista cone of depression now directly affecting San Pedro River base flow

New well data from groundwater monitoring wells at Fort Huachuca reveals that:

1. Excessive local groundwater pumping in the Fort Huachuca/Sierra Vista area is causing groundwater levels to drop adjacent to River at the eastern edge of Fort Huachuca; and,

2. The cone of depression resulting from the excessive deficit groundwater pumping in the Fort Huachuca/Sierra Vista area is now directly affecting the San Pedro River base flow.[1]

The new well data includes readings through April 25, 2005. Fort Huachuca’s groundwater monitoring wells are located on the east side of Fort Huachuca adjacent to the San Pedro River.[2] The interpretation of Fort Huachuca’s monitoring well data is supported by newly reviewed U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) data showing reduced water seeping from the regional aquifer to the San Pedro River in the Lewis Springs area.[3] Lewis Springs is located upstream from Fort Huachuca on the San Pedro River.

The San Pedro River is the last surviving free flowing, un-dammed desert river in the Southwest.[4] Stream flow during the driest times of the year seeps directly from the groundwater aquifer into the River.[5]

Excessive, unmitigated and increasing, local groundwater pumping from this aquifer threatens the San Pedro River.[6] The pumping deprives the San Pedro River of surface flow due to the existence of a direct hydrological connection between the water in the area’s underground aquifer and the surface water, or actual stream flow, in the River.[7]

The San Pedro stream flow reflects the surface of the aquifer, or the water table itself.[8] As pumping lowers the aquifer level or water table, stream flow is diminished.[9] During the driest time of the year, most of the surface or stream flow in the San Pedro River comes from this groundwater seeping into the River.[10] This flow is called base flow. San Pedro River base flow continues decreasing dramatically.[11]

A cone of depression is the hydraulic gradient, or valley in the groundwater table, which must be created to cause water to flow toward a well in order to pump water.[12] In an area of concentrated wells, the cone of depression from each well converges into a larger confluent cone of depression.[13]

Two large confluent cones of depression capture aquifer groundwater that would otherwise provide San Pedro stream flow.[14] One of the two problematic cones of depression intersects with the southern part of the River in the Palominas/Hereford area.[15] The other is located in the Fort Huachuca/Sierra Vista area.[16]

The Palominas/Hereford cone of depression underlies the San Pedro River and thus directly affects river flow in the area.[17] Base flow there has now become intermittently absent.[18] Not surprisingly, many endangered Huachuca Water Umbel populations have disappeared from this section of the River.[19]

Data from Fort Huachuca’s groundwater monitoring wells has been used in the past by Fort Huachuca, the Department of Defense (DoD), and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) to argue against any urgency for mitigation against the effects of the local groundwater pumping on River. The Fort Huachuca July 2002, Biological Assessment and the USFWS August 23, 2002, Biological Opinion on ongoing and planned military operations and activities at or near Fort Huachuca, state:

“…In a July 1, 1998, memorandum (Fenske 1998), Mr. Fenske presented monitoring well data suggesting that from April 1995 to April 1998 the groundwater gradient along a transect from Sierra Vista to the San Pedro River at Charleston was reversed only within about 3.5 miles of Sierra Vista (i.e. the cone of depression had not reached the river in this area).”[20]

“…Most investigators do not believe that Fort Huachuca and Sierra Vista cone of depression has ‘reached’ the San Pedro River. (…Fenske 1998…)”[21]

Owing in large part to such past use of Fort Huachuca groundwater monitoring well data, USFWS concluded that mitigation could wait until 2011.[22] This is obviously no longer even remotely true.

The Fort Huachuca/Sierra Vista cone of depression has now reached the San Pedro River east of Fort Huachuca.[23] It is now directly affecting the River.[24]

The August 23, 2002, Biological Opinion mitigation is also based on local groundwater deficit of 5,144 acre-feet/year.[25] According to ADWR data released on November 18, 2004, the deficit has increased by 63.3%, from -5,144 to -8,400 acre-feet/year.[26] According to USGS released on November 18, 2004, the deficit has increased by 134.3%, from -5,144 to -12,050 acre-feet/year, according to USGS 2003 data.[27]

SUMMARY:

1. Excessive groundwater pumping in the Fort Huachuca/Sierra Vista area is now directly impacting the San Pedro River east of Fort Huachuca.[28]

2. Less endangered Huachuca Water Umbel is now being found in the Palominas/Hereford area.[29]

3. A reduced amount of groundwater is seeping into the San Pedro River from the regional aquifer at Lewis Springs.[30]

4. The area’s groundwater deficit continues increasing.[31]

5. San Pedro River base flow continues declining.[32]

The San Pedro River can no longer wait for help. The time is NOW.

References:

ACOE 1970. Summary of Ground Water Supply Conditions, Fort Huachuca, Arizona, Department of the Army, Sacramento District, Corps of Engineers, Sacramento, California, July 1970.

ACOE 1974. Report on Water Supply, Ft. Huachuca and Vicinity, Arizona, Main Report, U.S. Army Engineer District, Los Angeles Corps of Engineers, March 29, 1974.

ACOE 1998. Memorandum for the Record. Subject: Compilation and Analysis of April 1995 to April 1998 Water-level Data at Monitoring and Test Wells, Fort Huachuca, AZ, Jon Fenske, P.E., Hydrologic Engineer, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, July 1, 1998.

ACOE 1999. Memorandum for the Record. Subject: Compilation and Analysis of April 1995 to October 1999 Water-level Data at Monitoring and Test Wells, Fort Huachuca, AZ, Jon Fenske, P.E., Hydrologic Engineer, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, November 6, 1999.

ACOE 2005. Monitoring Well Data, Fort Huachuca, Arizona, April 14, 1995 through April 25, 2005. 2003; U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Los Angeles Engineer District, May 9, 2005.

ADWR 1988. Putman, Frank, Kim Mitchell, Greg Bushner, “Water Resources of the Upper San Pedro Basin, Arizona,” Hydrology Division, Arizona Department of Water Resources, Phoenix, Arizona, July 1988.

ADWR 1991. Arizona Department of Water Resources, Preliminary hydrographic survey report for the San Pedro River watershed. Volume 1: General Assessment. Phoenix, Arizona. 548 pp.

ADWR 1994b. Upper San Pedro River case study, Arizona Riparian Protection Program, Legislative Report, Arizona Department of Water Resources, Pages 147-208, July 1994.

ADWR 1996b. Corell, S. W., et al. 1996. A groundwater flow model of the Sierra Vista subwatershed of the Upper San Pedro Basin­southeastern Arizona. Phoenix: Arizona Department of Water Resources, Hydrology Division, Modeling Report No. 10. December 1996.

AGFD 1993. Arizona Riparian Inventory and Mapping Project, Arizona Game and Fish Department, Phoenix, December 1, 1993.

American Birding Association 1995. American Birding Association, Inc., “Winging It”, Volume 7, Number 10, October 1995.

Arizona Highways 1989. “San Pedro Riparian Area,” Sam Negri, Arizona Highways Magazine, April 1989.

ASL 1994. ASL Hydrologic & Environmental Services in conjunction with R. Allan Freeze Engineering, Inc., SIERRA VISTA SUBWATERSHED HYDROLOGY PRIMER, produced for the City of Sierra Vista, Bella Vista Water Company, Inc. and Pueblo Del Sol Water Company, December 1994.

BLM 1987. Jackson, W., T. Martinez, P. Cuplin, W.L. Minckley, B. Shelby, P. Summers, D. McGlothlin, and B. Van Haveren. 1987. Assessment of water conditions and management opportunities in support of riparian values: BLM San Pedro River Properties, Arizona. U.S. Department of Interior, Bureau of Land Management. 180 pp.

CBD v. DoD 1999. Order, Center for Biological Diversity et al. v. Donald H. Rumsfeld, Secretary of Defense, et al., CIV99-203 TUC ACM, 198 F. Supp. 2d 1139, April 8, 2002.

CEC 1999a. “Ribbon of Life, An Agenda for Preserving Transboundary Migratory Bird Habitat on the Upper San Pedro River, Commission For Environmental Cooperation, 1999

CEC 1999b. “Sustaining and Enhancing Riparian Migratory Bird Habitation on the Upper San Pedro River, Final Draft,” Commission for Environmental Cooperation San Pedro Expert Team, March 1999.

CEQ 1981. David Sheridan, Desertification of the United States, Council on Environmental Quality 1981.

Department of the Interior 2004. “Water Management of the Regional Aquifer in the Sierra Vista Subwatershed, Arizona – 2004 Report to Congress, Prepared in consultation with the Secretaries of Agriculture and Defense and in cooperation with the Upper San Pedro Partnership in response to Public Law 108 – 136, Section 321,” U.S. Department of the Interior, Draft Version November 18, 2004.

EEC 2001. Huachuca Water Umbel (Lilaeopsis schaffneriana subspecies Recurva), Fort Huachuca Monitoring and San Pedro Riparian NCA Inventory Reports; prepared for: Directorate of Installation Support, U.S. Army Garrison, Fort Huachuca, Arizona, Environmental and Natural Resources Division; prepared by: Engineering and Environmental Consultants, Inc., Sierra Vista, Arizona, Contract #DABT 63-99-D-0028, T.O. 70; 2001.

EEC 2005a. Huachuca Water Umbel (Lilaeopsis schaffneriana recurva), Fort Huachuca Monitoring and San Pedro Riparian National Conservation Area; Directorate of Installation Support, U.S. Army Garrison, Fort Huachuca, Arizona, Environmental and Natural Resources Division; Engineering and Environmental Consultants, Inc., Tucson, Arizona, Contract #DABK 13-03-D-0006, T.O. 42; January 2005.

EPA 2005. Ground Water Primer, EPA Region 5 and Agricultural & Biological Engineering, Purdue University, Ground Water Basics, Hydrogeology, Key hydrogeology terms and concepts; http://www.epa.gov/seahome/groundwater/src/ground.htm#toc; http://www.epa.gov/seahome/groundwater/src/basics.htm#menu"; http://www.epa.gov/seahome/groundwater/src/geo1.htm#menu; http://www.epa.gov/seahome/groundwater/src/cone.htm; February 4, 2005.

Fenske 1998. Memorandum for the Record. Subject: Compilation and Analysis of April 1995 to April 1998 Water-level Data at Monitoring and Test Wells, Fort Huachuca, AZ, Jon P. Fenske, P.E., Hydrologic Engineer, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, July 1, 1998.

Fort Huachuca 2002c. Programmatic Biological Assessment for Ongoing and Programmed Future Military Operations and Activities at Fort Huachuca, Arizona, Environmental and Natural Resources Division, Directorate of Installation Support, U.s. Army Garrison, Fort Huachuca, Arizona, July 2002.

Haas and Frye 1997. Hydrology and Water Quality Effects on Lilaeopsis schaffneriana ssp. Recurva, Project Report, Submitted to: Arizona Department of Agriculture, Phoenix, and U.S. Army Garrison, ATZS-EHB, Fort Huachuca, Arizona; from Sarah K. Haas and Robert J. Frye, Soil, Water & Environmental Sciences Department, University of Arizona, Tucson, AZ 85721; October 1997.

National Geographic 2000. “A Special Place, The Patience of a Saint San Pedro River,” Barbara Kingsolver, National Geographic, April 2000.

New York Times 1999. “In Arizona Desert, a Desert Oasis in Peril,” Jon Christensen, New York Times, May 4, 1999.

SWCBD v. DoD 1994. Memorandum Opinion, SWCBD v. William Perry, U.S. Secretary of Defense, et al., CIV 94-598 TUC ACM, August 30, 1995.

USGS 1999a. Pool, D.R, and Alissa L. Coes, Hydrogeologic Investigations of the Sierra Vista Subwatershed of the Upper San Pedro Basin, Cochise County, Southeast Arizona, Water-Resources Investigations Report 99-4197, USGS, 1999.

USGS 1999b. “Ground Water and Surface Water, A Single Resource, U.S.
Geological Survey Circular 1139,” by Thomas C. Winter, Judson W. Harvey, O. Lehn Franke, William M. Alley, Denver, Colorado, USGS, 1999.

USGS 2005a. USGS Website, http://waterdata.usgs.gov/az/nwis/gwlevels?search_criteria=lat_long_bounding_box&submitted_form=introduction; Lat-Long box (DMS): North Latitude, 313313; South Latitude, 313310; West Longitude 110826; East Longitude 110822; Well #4, 313312110082301; Well #5, 313312110082303; Well #2, 31331210082501; Well #3, 313312110082502; June 2, 2005.

USGS 2005b. U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) Website, Daily Streamflow for Arizona, USGS 09471000 SAN PEDRO RIVER AT CHARLESTON, AZ.; through September 30, 2004; http://nwis.waterdata.usgs.gov/az/nwis/discharge/?site_no=09471000&agency_cd=USGS; June 6, 2005.

USFWS 1999e. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Biological Opinion concerning activities, authorized, carried out, or funded by the Department of the Army at and near Fort Huachuca, Arizona, for the next 10 years, #AESO/ES 2-21-98-F-266, October 27, 1999.

USFWS 2002. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Biological Opinion concerning impacts that may result from activities authorized, carried out, or funded by the Department of the Army at and near Fort Huachuca, Arizona. #AESO/ES 2-21-02- F-229 August 23, 2002.

[1] ACOE 2005
[2] ACOE 1998, 1999
[3] USGS 2005a
[4] AGFD 1993; American Birding Association 1995; Arizona Highways 1989; CBD v. DoD 1999; CEC 1999a; CEQ 1981; National Geographic 2000; New York Times 1999
[5] ADWR 1988, 1991, 1994b; CEC 1999b; CEQ 1981; USGS 1999a; USFWS 1999e, 2002
[6] CEC 1999b; CBD v. DoD 1999, SWCBD v. DoD 1994; USFWS 2002
[7] ACOE 1970, 1974; ADWR 1994b; ASL 1994; USGS 1999a, 1999b
[8] ACOE 1970, 1974; ADWR 1994b; CEC 1999b; USGS 1999a, 1999b
[9] ACOE 1970; ACOE 1974; ADWR 1994b; CBD v. DoD 1999, CEC 1999b; SWCBD v. DoD 1994; USFWS 2002; USGS 1999a, 1999b
[10] ADWR 1988, 1991, 1994b; CEC 1999b; CEQ 1981; USGS 1999a; USFWS 1999e, 2002
[11] ADWR 1996b; CEC 1999b; USGS 1999a, 2005b
[12] CEC 1999b, EPA 2005
[13] CEC 1999b
[14] ACOE 1970, 1974; ADWR 1988, 1991, 1994b; ASL 1994; CEC 1999b; CEQ 1981; USGS 1999a; USFWS 1999e, 2002
[15] ADWR 1996b; CEC 1999b; USFWS 2002; USGS 1999a
[16] Ibid.
[17] BLM 1987; USFWS 1999e, 2002, p. 92; USGS 1999a
[18] Ibid.
[19] EEC 2001, 2005a; Haas and Frye 1997
[20] Fort Huachuca 2002c, p. 73; USFWS 2002, p. 87
[21] Fort Huachuca 2002c, p. 76; USFWS 2002, p. 92
[22] USFWS 2002
[23] ACOE 2005; USGS 2005b
[24] ACOE 2005; USGS 2005a, 2005b
[25] Fort Huachuca 2002c, p, 88, Appendix K; USFWS 2002, p. 90
[26] Department of the Interior 2004, Appendix C – Sierra Vista Subwatershed Ground-Water Budget, Table C1. Summarization of predevelopment ground-water budgets for the Sierra Vista Subwatershed, ADWR 2002 data; and Appendix D – ADWR Ground-Water Budget for the Sierra Vista Subwatershed for 2002; Fort Huachuca 2002c, p, 88, Appendix K; USFWS 2002,
p. 90
[27] Department of the Interior 2004, Appendix C – Sierra Vista Subwatershed Ground-Water Budget, Table C1. Summarization of predevelopment ground-water budgets for the Sierra Vista Subwatershed, USGS 2003 data; Fort Huachuca 2002c, p, 88, Appendix K; USFWS 2002, p. 90
[28] ACOE 2005; USGS 2005b
[29] EEC 2001, 2005a; Haas and Frye 1997
[30] USGS 2005a
[31] Department of the Interior 2004, Appendix C – Sierra Vista Subwatershed Ground-Water Budget, Table C1. Summarization of predevelopment ground-water budgets for the Sierra Vista Subwatershed, ADWR 2002 data; and Appendix D – ADWR Ground-Water Budget for the Sierra Vista Subwatershed for 2002; Appendix C – Sierra Vista Subwatershed Ground-Water Budget, Table C1. Summarization of predevelopment ground-water budgets for the Sierra Vista Subwatershed, USGS 2003 data; Fort Huachuca 2002c, p, 88, Appendix K; USFWS 2002, p. 90
[32] USGS 2005b

(end)


more press releases. . .

Go back