A judge puts the brakes on a plan to transfer water from farms along the Colorado River in rural La Paz County to the city of Queen Creek near Phoenix, a victory for a coalition of western Arizona counties that banded together to fight the transfer. did.
In 2018, GSC Farms near Cibola agreed to sell and transfer ownership of approximately 2,913 acre-feet of Colorado River water each year to the City of Queen Creek, a growing city near Phoenix, for approximately $21 million. In practice, this would require moving the water further upstream to the Mark Wilmer Pumping Station north of Parker and through the Central Arizona Project canal system. GSC Farm and Queen Creek then applied to the Federal Bureau of Reclamation for approval of the transfer.
The reclamation produced a “no significant impact” certificate, allowing the relocation to proceed on the basis that it “will not have a significant impact on the human environment.”
Mojave, Yuma, and La Paz counties, along with the City of Yuma, have taken legal action to disagree with the landfill, dispute the “administrative record” on which the landfill was found, and effectively say the landfill will not occur. I objected to the idea. Environmental impacts of relocation. GSC Farms responded by stating, among other things, that the county had no standing to become involved.
The federal court's ruling this week was controversial, but the result was a victory for the county. U.S. District Court for Arizona Judge Michael T. Liburdi rejected arguments by Mojave and La Paz counties that their residents would be affected by the water transfer, but rejected Yuma County's argument that the transfer would affect water quality. agreed. Improves water chemistry by reducing downstream flow. The fact that setting a precedent for transferring water could encourage the growth of cities like Queen Creek is also a factor, so the landfill is required to complete a full environmental impact report.
In his judgment, the judge wrote:
“Plaintiffs have raised at least two important questions about how water transfers could have significant environmental effects. …Second, Plaintiffs argue that water transfers have the potential to cumulatively have a significant effect on the growth of Queen Creek and cause significant impacts. … Reclamation's decision not to conduct an EIS was arbitrary and capricious.''
With limited Colorado River water available during a major drought, many water users, including Arizona's Queen Creek, are looking to the Southwest for future water sources. But this week's decision shows that not all such efforts will be easy, as people with vested interests like river communities are fighting for their futures and there are few easy answers. It seems to be clear.
