« May 2007 | Main | July 2007 »
June 30, 2007
June 25, 2007
The Future
Senator Christensen says that Senator Louden, chair of the Natural Resources Committee, will not meet with him to discuss oversight of the NRDs. At least that is what the McCook Gazette reports Senator Christensen as saying: http://www.mccookgazette.com/story/1217554.html
The Legislature, specifically the Natural Resource Committee, is responsible for overseeing the DNR and the NRDs. Several of the key statements made by the DNR over the last several years have been wrong. There are a number of errors in the computer simulation that is used to govern the agreement on the Republican River with Kansas; yet, the DNR and the NRDs prefer to keep the errors because it helps advance a goal they have.
There are two senators that represent the Republican River Basin. Both are on the Natural Resources Committee. All of the other senators look to Senator Christensen and Carlson for guidance on the subject of water for the Basin. The other senators defer to these two individuals on this issue.
Senator Christensen already has oversight power of the DNR and NRDs. He is in a position to cause the DNR to provide answers and to correct errors. There is no reason to defer the matter to someone else. State Senators have the power to control the money for the agencies they have created and they set the overall policies. If the Senators don't get the answers they want or if they don't like the direction the DNR or the NRDs go, then they have the authority to do something about it.
If a Senator does not do his job, then the DNR and the NRDs can do as they please. Today, the DNR and the NRDs prefer to base their decisions on a computer simulation that has several major flaws. To them, it doesn't matter if the foundation they are basing decisions on is flawed because the majority of these policy makers have already decided to reduce the amount of irrigation in the Basin, regardless of what the facts are.
Not all NRD board members share this agenda; but the majority of each of the three NRDs in the Basin have gone along with the idea that the only politically acceptable policy is to reduce the amount of water used. Any suggestion that we increase the supply instead of reduce usage is excluded from the process.
What is at stake is the long term future of the region. If we slowly shut off the wells, then we will have fewer jobs and fewer people living here. Do it slowly enough and maybe no one will care. In 30 or 40 years from now, many of us will not be here anyway so what do we care if we sacrifice the future economy as long as we can survive today?
Most of the NRDs have decided that they prefer to accept a slow shut down rather than risk the immediate shutdown that has been threatened by the State. Besides, many of the board members of the Upper Republican NRD (the most aggressive of the Basin’s NRDs) agree with the idea that it is better to reduce pumping than it is to figure out how to bring water into the Basin.
Take a look at the cities of the western United States. Are they paying people to leave the city and move back east where there is more water? Do they put up a “no more growth” sign, prohibiting new homes or new businesses? Does Japan shut down its economy because it doesn’t have any oil? No. What these places do is bring in the resources they need. Our society and most of the things we use in our life exist because humans have chosen to move resources, including water, from places of where they are in surplus to where they are needed.
I will argue that the best path for the area is to increase the water supply. This creates jobs, replenishes the aquifer, puts more water into the streams and lakes. But, that will not happen until we, as a community, choose to elect people who want that to happen. Look down the road 20 years. What do you want our community to look like? Do we want fewer people here, or do we prefer a community that is strong enough to keep the services we have? I will argue that if you want a strong community with more water and with enough jobs for people to enjoy that water, we should increase our supply.
The water exists. It is a renewable resource. It is simply a matter of putting in office people who see that and want to make it happen.
June 22, 2007
Basin Buys More Water
This turned out to be a re-announcement of what was done in May. Kind of like holding your Grand Opening a year after you really opened. Just a publicity stunt.
The Beatrice Sun reports an AP story that there has been another purchase of surface water from the same people that water was purchased from just a few weeks ago.
The story is a bit contradictory as it reports that the State made the purchase but also notes that only the NRDs have the authority to levy the taxes to make the purchase.
The McCook Gazette reports the same story but gives a different impression.
June 21, 2007
Colorado Plans
The Sterling Journal has a rather blunt report on the State of Colorado plans to force the shutdown of irrigation wells in the Republican Basin.
Harlan County Reservoir
For more information on Harlan County Reservoir visit the Bureau of Reclamation web site.
June 13, 2007
NRD Coalition
June 12, 2007
Flood Flows Don't Count
The people who negotiated the agreement with Kansas decided that flood water should not count as credit towards Nebraska's compliance with the Republican River Compact. The definition of flood flows is given below.
1. Flood Flows: If in any calendar year there are five consecutive months in
which the total actual stream flow1 at the Hardy gage is greater than 325,000 Acrefeet,
or any two consecutive months in which the total actual stream flow is greater
than 200,000 Acre-feet, the annual flow in excess of 400,000 Acre-feet at the Hardy
gage will be considered to be Flood Flows that will be subtracted from the Virgin
Water Supply to calculate the Computed Water Supply, and Allocations. The Flood
Flow in excess of 400,000 Acre-feet at the Hardy gage will be subtracted from the
Virgin Water Supply of the Main Stem to compute the Computed Water Supply
unless the Annual Gaged Flows from a Sub-basin were in excess of the flows
shown for that Sub-basin in Attachment 1. These excess Sub-basin flows shall be
considered to be Sub-basin Flood Flows.
If there are Sub-basin Flood Flows, the total of all Sub-basin Flood Flows shall be
compared to the amount of Flood Flows at the Hardy gage. If the sum of the Subbasin
Flood Flows are in excess of the Flood Flow at the Hardy gage, the flows to
be deducted from each Sub-basin shall be the product of the Flood Flows for each
Sub-basin times the ratio of the Flood Flows at the Hardy gage divided by the sum
of the Flood Flows of the Sub-basin gages. If the sum of the Sub-basin Flood Flows
is less than the Flood Flow at the Hardy gage, the entire amount of each Sub-basin
Flood Flow shall be deducted from the Virgin Water Supply to compute the
Computed Water Supply of that Sub-basin for that year. The remainder of the Flood
Flows will be subtracted from the flows of the Main Stem.
June 05, 2007
David Pope Resigns
One of the key players in the Republican River Basin dispute is resigning.
June 01, 2007
Vegetation Control
KHAS TV story on efforts by an RC&D to persuade landowners to allow the government to enter private property to kill Russian Olives and Salt Cedar.