Why does WaterClaim exist?

Early in 2004, Steve and Gregg Smith began to ask the NRD questions about how the Model that dictates our economy works.  Most of those questions were ignored. 

So, we decided that if a group of us asked the questions, then perhaps we could get answers.  We asked those who had concerns about what was happening to join us.  As a result, WaterClaim came into existence.  We, as a group, then asked the questions.  However, most of the questions the group asked were ignored. 

There were public information meetings that informed us of how things were going to work.   However, we did not get our questions answered.

There were public hearings that took our comments.  The Board chose to proceed, even though 80% to 100% of the comments at these hearings opposed what the Board did.

So, WaterClaim asked the court to decide if their closed meetings should be public.  We thought it was a simple question.  Either they should be, or they shouldn’t.  We hoped the answer would be accepted by both parties.  We didn’t expect the question to be so vigorously fought.

WaterClaim wants it to be clear.  WaterClaim wants a strong NRD.  We believe that local control is very important.  We support an NRD’s authority to make decisions regarding how much water each person may use. 

Our primary complaint with the current NRD is its refusal to provide the public with all of the facts.  We grant that the NRD does not have all of the facts.  The DNR hides many of the facts from the NRD.  However, we believe it is the duty of the NRD to obtain these facts before committing to any agreement with the DNR. 

There are serious questions about how the software that controls our future works.  There are almost no official answers. The public has access to very few of the documents.  As a result, we have reverse-engineered what we can.  We were the first to report that even if we shut off all of the wells, Nebraska would still fail to comply by the end of 2007.  We have made a number of predictions and have been correct in these.  We are often accused of saying something misleading; but when asked where we are in error so we can correct it, we get no answer.

We do not want the fight.  We simply want the answers to our questions.  We want the NRD to make decisions based on the best information.   We know that the NRD is making decisions without all of the available facts. 

WaterClaim has done several things that are not liked.  We have asked questions the NRD and the DNR do not want to answer. (You can see our questions on our web site.)  We have asked the Judge to decide if the questions should be answered.  We have asked the public to vote for board members who will answer the questions. 

We do not know the motive of the current NRD members.  We know some are friends.  We believe that most want what is best for the community.  However, some believe the best way to do that is to put all of their faith in the State and trust whatever the State suggests (think Neville Chamberlain).  For some, it is a matter of pride.  For others, it is the idea that no one should be able to use more water than they personally can.  Some are using the Agreement with Kansas to control a different issue.

I have spent the last month in Lincoln working on water issues.  I have talked with a number of people involved in water.  I believe that a large majority want irrigation in the Upper Republican NRD to stop.  They want it to stop because of the declining aquifer.  They think our lowering of the aquifer is no different than the clear cutting of big redwood trees.  Some in the local community agree.  While I do not think that irrigation should stop, I do think the aquifer decline is a serious problem. 

How we stop the decline is another area of disagreement.  As a State, we have three options:

1. Ignore the problem.  Continue to use the water until it is gone.  For some, that will happen in 20 years; for others, in 400 years.  For most, it will last another 200 years at the current usage rate.
2. Voluntarily shut down irrigation.  This is desired by more people than you might guess.  Usually, the people who argue for a stop in the decline say we can accomplish that by reducing usage to half of what we have now.  I disagree.  I think it would require a reduction to less than 2 inches a year to stop the decline.  More is possible on sandy soil and less on hard ground.  The facts are unknown.  Yet, whatever the amount actually is, it is less than what is needed to keep most people living here.
3. We import water. 

Most of the current NRD board members dismiss the idea of importing water as an unrealistic fantasy.  The current Board prefers to defend our current usage but realize that the District will have to give up a bit more each year. 

WaterClaim’s fear is this.  Nebraska fails to comply by the first deadline, which is the end of 2007.  At that point, the issue gets turned over to a Federal judge who could decide to shut down all of the wells.  That would destroy our communities.  Will that happen?  Who knows?  It might or it might not, but it is a very real possibility.  That is why we want our questions answered.  We want to be able to do what we can to make sure Nebraska complies.  We prefer to do that by working with the NRD, not against it.  But, the stakes are too high to allow policy to be made in closed sessions and for the facts to remain hidden.