The Morning Blend
Welcome
Complete Media Kit
FORT HUACHUCA — A longtime critic of Fort Huachuca’s impact on the San Pedro River claims the 2002 biological opinion between the post and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service is badly flawed which has led to the errors being incorporated into the 2007 biological opinion.
Phoenix physician Dr. Robin Silver said a 21-page study from the Center for Sustainable Economy, a Santa Fe, N.M., based organization, challenges the Army’s figures based on per capita instead of the more scientific economic model.
Silver is chairman of the Tucson-based Center for Biological Diversity.
Garrison Commander Col. Melissa Sturgeon said “the fort stands by its economic analysis and population numbers.”
|
|
The Center for Sustainable Economy study contends the use of population based methods “are facially inadequate for this task because they fail to account for water use associated with the vast majority of off-post induced economic development …”
The study’s conclusion also said that an economic-based method “may be far more accurate” and doing it that way will “likely find a water deficit liability grater than the 54.3 percent found by Fort Huachuca’s 2002 biological assessment.”
The reality is that preliminary data reviewed by the New Mexico group “may find the fort’s water liability to be as high as 80 percent.”
Although fort officials have yet to have a chance to review the New Mexico center’s study, Sturgeon said the Army’s Economic Income Forecasting System is used to determine figures in the biological opinion.
“Using the EIFS, the fort took responsibility for the water usage of approximately 7,000 additional people who are not employed by the installation but live in the area,” the colonel said.
John Talberth, who was involved in the Center for Sustainable Economy study, said the procedure used by the fort and Fish and Wildlife Service is insufficient to properly address the water woes the fort is creating in the Sierra Vista Subwatershed.
“Using a population base model is counterintuitive,” said Talberth, who has a doctorate and is the president and senior economist of the center.
Looking at the total economic impact and how it causes additional stress on the water system, especially how it creates problems for the San Pedro River, is better, he said.
“Follow the dollars, not the population,” Talberth said, is the best analytical solution.
The New Mexico center and the Center for Biological Diversity are not connected, he said. The biodiversity group paid to have the analysis done.
In the past, Silver and the Center for Biological Diversity sued the fort, claiming its existence leads to additional growth on and off the post and that is killing the San Pedro River.
The use of the 2002 biological opinion as a starting point for the new agreement needs to be reviewed, Silver said.
The fort has increased its expenditures by nearly 80 percent in the past few years, and more money spent by the post creates more water use, Silver said.
“Cash equals activity,” he said.
Past lawsuits against the post have led to changes by fort officials, Silver said. And, he said, it appears there may be a need for another lawsuit to force fort officials to correct the errors of their ways.
Sturgeon said the post “continues its proven water conservation efforts and environmental leadership in the Sierra Vista Subwatershed.”
HERALD/REVIEW senior reporter Bill Hess can be reached at 515-4615 or by e-mail at bill.hess@svherald.com.
ON THE NET
The Center for Sustainable Economy study “Improving Water Deficit Liability Calculations through Economic Modeling” can be found at www.sustainable-economy.org.
Jack Watkins wrote on Aug 5, 2007 5:29 PM: