| 2007 Surface Water Lease / Purchase Analysis Modified May 10, 2007 to account for additional water available | ||||||||
| District | Acres Irrigated | Total Paid | Who Pays | Expected Benefit in Acre Feet | Evaporation Credit | Total Credit Expected | Amount Paid to District Farmer per Acre | Cost to buyers per Acre Foot Benefit |
| Frenchman Cambridge | 17,664 | $7,785,000 | NRDs | 12,500 | 5,000 | 17,500 | $368 | $445 |
| Frenchman Valley | 9,292 | $640,000 | NRDs | 5,600 | 5,600 | 11,200 | $68 | $57 |
| Riverside | 672 | $126,000 | NRDs | 1,400 | 1,200 | 2,600 | $172 | $48 |
| Bostwick | 23,000 | $5,700,000 | State | 23,000 | 21,700 | 44,700 | $243 | $127 |
| Total | 50,628 | $14,251,000 | 42,500 | 34,500 | 76,000 | |||
| The credits in acre feet are estimates
that will not be known until sometime in 2008. Additional
flows below Harlan are included in the Bostwick numbers. The
prices paid for the surface water are set and do not vary as more or
less water is available. As the reservoirs have more water in
them now than there was at the time the deal was negotiated, there
should be additional benefits and a lower cost per acre foot. Part of the reason that there is a large difference in cost paid per acre foot is that the ditches with the higher costs have fewer farmers with commingled groundwater wells and surface water rights. The farmers with commingled wells will be able to receive the surface water payment and still irrigate with their groundwater well. That is allowed for 2007. LB 701 prohibits that in 2008. The NRDs want that prohibition removed because they believe that the price for surface water rights will go up if they actually buy both surface and groundwater allocations. The accumulated overages for 2003 through 2006 are 136,000 acre feet. The lowest allocation that Nebraska has ever received is 182,820 acre feet. The highest depletion caused by groundwater, according to the Model, was 229,315 acre feet in 2001. Using those two worst case numbers as samples for 2007, Nebraska might be over its allocation by 46,495 acre feet. Buying 76,800 acre feet of credit would actually reduce Nebraska's accumulated overage by 30,305 acre feet. That is the worst case. In actuality, it is likely that the increased rainfall along the Republican River in the spring of 2007 and lower groundwater depletions charged against Nebraska for 2007 will result in a dramatic reduction of the accumulated overages. There is also an error of 8,700 acre feet to Nebraska's credit found by John Thorburn of the Tri Basin NRD. It should definitely be credited for 2007 and potentially can be retroactively applied to prior years if Kansas allows it or if the US Supreme Court recognizes it (if Kansas decides to return to Court). CREP/EQUIP and reduced pumping allocations will have a minor benefit to Nebraska in 2007. The State is saying CREP/EQIP will provide a 4,000 acre foot benefit to Nebraska in 2007 at a cost of about $7,000,000 in Federal dollars. That works out to about $1,675 per acre foot credit. Most of the land enrolled in these programs is poor quality with limited pumping capability. The benefit is overstated, as a number of acres have pulled out of the programs due to high prices for corn. When some of the major flaws in the Model are addressed and when the data that goes into the Model are corrected, Nebraska should be in even better shape. In summary, Nebraska should be able to eliminate between a 1/3 and 1/2 of the accumulated overages by the end of 2007. While this will not be enough to keep in compliance. it will be a major step toward that. It should be enough of a step to cause Kansas to pause before pursuing legal action against Nebraska.
|
||||||||