State Compliance Options
The ruling by the Nebraska Supreme Court that the State is responsible for Compact compliance seriously weakens the ability of the NRDs to protect the region’s economy. Because the NRDs do not now have a way to financially influence the outcome, the area is dependent on the goodwill of the State to solve the compliance issue without hurting the economy of the region.
As the Governor has told several individuals, only five percent of the vote comes from the Republican River Basin. And, there are only two out of forty-nine Senators who represent the area.
Even so, I personally believe that the Governor wants to solve the problem in such a way as to help the Republican River Basin as much as possible while living within the political reality that there are a lot of people, both inside and outside of the area, who want there to be less irrigation. This will be a true test of his leadership ability. It is now the job of the Governor to protect a politically weak part of the State from economic ruin. This will require that he lead.
Here is a list of the options he has:
- Limiting surface water diversions.
- Purchasing surface water and leaving this water in the stream.
- Shutting off groundwater irrigation wells.
- Augmenting the stream from groundwater wells.
- Augmenting the stream from another Basin, such as Colorado does.
- Reducing conservation practices that limit the virgin water supply.
- Removal of most of the massive vegetative growth that has occurred since the dams were built in the 1940s and 1950s (not just the 1% that have been temporarily labeled invasive species).
- Correct several of the formulas in the 2002 accounting procedures negotiated with Kansas that artificially favor or disfavor certain types of activities.
- Or, some combination of the above.
Without money, the NRDs are limited in what they can do. While many people are not happy with the NRDs, they are essential to the area. They will play an important role in persuading the Governor and Legislature to make wise policy.
WaterClaim has always supported strong local NRDs, even though we have disagreed with the secret meetings and with their willingness to accept bad information from the State.
It is now likely that there will be a State water tax on either each acre inch pumped or on each irrigation well. If a different tax levy can be imposed by a river basin, with that money used within the river basin taxed, then solutions can be funded in a way that is acceptable to a lot of people. To be fair, some tax should also be placed on conservation practices, since they cause most of the stream flow depletions. There are twice as many acres with two foot high dams on them as there are irrigated acres, and these little dams hold back a lot of water from getting to the stream.
View image of terrace locations.
The following is a graph from a report by a professor at Kansas State who has been hired by KS/CO/NE to study what causes stream flow depletions. It says that stream flows in 1850 were no more than they are now.
Almost all of the USGS measures start around 1930, near the peak of river flows. So, what caused the amount of water in the stream flow to increase so much between 1850 and 1925? The answer is sod busting and poor erosion control. Notice the share of responsibility Kansas attaches to groundwater irrigation. A copy of the study is available on the WaterClaim site.
View image of stream flow increases and causes of decreases.