Agrarian Group Calls for Deeper DANA Probe

Farmers in Valencia are trying to widen the argument over the DANA disaster. Not just who failed on the day, but what had been left undone for years before the water hit. That is the real news here. Cristóbal Aguado, who leads AVA-ASAJA, used a piece published May 11-12 to push the Catarroja court to examine why the flooding became so destructive in the first place. ### What is AVA-ASAJA asking for? Aguado says the court should dig into the causes that “elevated the magnitude” of the catastrophe — basically, the physical and planning failures that may have turned a severe storm into a far worse flood. He says AVA-ASAJA is the only agrarian organization formally joined in the Catarroja proceedings, so the group is trying to put farming infrastructure, waterways and land management into a case that has often centered on emergency warnings and political decisions. (agroclm.com) ### Why are farmers focused on channels and barrancos? Because their argument is very concrete. Aguado points to barrancos and river channels that were still choked with vegetation, and says that poor maintenance made overflows more violent. He names places like the Carraixet and compares their current state with the Magro and the Poyo before the October 29, 2024 disaster. The claim is simple — if water cannot move cleanly, it carries reeds, debris and force into towns and fields. (agroclm.com) ### What does this have to do with the court case? Quite a lot, turns out. The Catarroja court is already looking beyond the immediate emergency chain. Judge Nuria Ruiz Tobarra has been asking why the Generalitat did not use publicly available meteorological data to anticipate the scale of the disaster, and she has requested records from weather and water agencies tied to the flood day. So AVA-ASAJA is pushing on an open door — just from a different angle. (agroclm.com) ### What has AVA-ASAJA already put into the case? The group did more than complain in public. Back in July 2025, the judge called Teodoro Velázquez, the engineer behind AVA-ASAJA’s expert report, after the organization had been admitted as a popular accusation in the case. That report argued that the Júcar river authority had failed to carry out hydraulic works and had not implemented an early warning system. It also said none of 23 channeling actions and none of four planned flood-control dams had been tendered under the flood-risk plan cited in the report. (elpais.com) ### So is this about emergency response or infrastructure? Both — and that is why the fight matters. One line of inquiry asks who knew what, when, and why warnings and coordination failed on October 29, 2024. The other asks whether years of neglected works, blocked channels and unfinished flood-control systems made the disaster inherently harder to survive. Farmers want the second question treated as central, not secondary. (castellonplaza.com) ### Why are they speaking up again now? Because it has been about a year and a half since the flood, and reconstruction is still a live grievance. Aguado also complains that Tragsa’s work in ditches and canals has been slowed by bureaucracy and environmental restrictions, while some farmers are still waiting for access and repairs near public waterways. So this is not only about blame for the past. It is also about whether the same vulnerabilities are being left in place before the next storm. (agroclm.com) ### What is the bottom line? AVA-ASAJA is trying to make the DANA case less narrow. The group wants the Catarroja investigation to treat floodplain maintenance, hydraulic works and channel management as possible drivers of the death toll and damage — not just background conditions. With the judge still broadening requests for evidence in a disaster that killed 230 people, that argument now has a real shot at shaping what accountability means. (agroclm.com) (elpais.com)