Allocations fail to rebound

Allocations have generally followed precipitation until 2003.  The question is why has the allocation failed to respond recently?  If the allocation had increased in 2005 or 2006 by amount similar to what it has in the past then the accumulated overage that Nebraska has now could be have been eliminated.  Questions to Ann Bleed regarding this chart have produced contradictory answers.  She has seen the chart.  The three answers given.  The first was that precipitation in the 1980's was above average.  As can bee seen from the chart, that is not correct.   Second answer, the drought was severe in 2002 and conservation have caused a decrease.  True, but the amount of precipitation was near normal in 04, 05, and 06 but the allocation continues down and the conservation practices have been in place for many years.  They didn't just start to have a major effect.   Third answer, the allocation will not recover.  It will continue to decline regardless of what precipitation does.  You can draw your own conclusions regarding that idea.   

There is now a fourth answer.  The current explanation by the DNR is that there are two types of droughts.  One is a precipitation drought and the other is a hydrological drought.  A hydrological drought is explained as below normal stream flows. These lower than normal stream flows are said to be caused by a delayed reaction to low precipitation.  Look at the chart and draw your own conclusions. How much of a delay to precipitation has there been in the past.

This chart shows that until recently allocations followed precipitation.  However, since 2002, allocations seem to be based on stream flow not precipitation. 

As of spring 2007, Nebraska is about  136,000 acre feet over its allocation.  Notice that the allocation is about 100,000 acre feet below normal in each year since 2002. If the allocation for just one year was 136,000 acre more than what it was and the consumptive use did not change, then the entire accumulated overage would be erased.