Request for Official Data from the NRD.  Presented to Upper Republican NRD April 19, 2004.

Why does the NRD need to know:  

1.      The official number and location of quick response wells?  

One of the primary proposals being made by the DNR is a reduction in the amount of water used.  The DNR is suggesting that the reduction be greater for the quick response wells than for the others.  If this NRD does not know how many wells there are or where these wells are, then it is impossible to know:

a.      The loss caused by this reduction.

b.      The amount of money needed to compensate for this unequal taking of a water allocation.

c.      The number of people that will be affected by these changes.  

2.      The contribution of any particular group of wells to the depletion in stream flow?  

If the well contribution factor to stream flow by an upland well is less than 5%, then the proposed reduction in pumpage of 10% would result in a half of one percent savings but cause 20 times that amount of economic damage.  In order for the NRD to make a wise decision on how much to cut and from where to cut, it is necessary to know the effect of the cuts.  If the NRD makes cuts in allocation without understanding the effectiveness of those cuts, then it is likely to do great harm to the economy with little practical effect.  Making surgical cuts on the wrong farm isn’t likely to cure the problem.  

3.      The surface water diversions?  

The surface water diversions have a direct relationship to the amount of water that must be reduced.  In order to make forecasts that will allow farmers to plan their crop, the NRD needs to know these numbers.  

4.      DNR projections of allocation for dry, normal and wet years?  

The NRD cannot forecast or budget without these numbers.   

5.      Lag Effect for the extended future?  

The NRD needs to know the long-range effect of the Lag.  If it does not know this estimate, then it does not know the true Model effect of pumping from upland wells.  Does a reduction of 10% have an effect this year, 10 years, 100 years, or 1000 years from now?   If the answer is not known, then any reduction is arbitrary and will be difficult to defend in court.  

6.      Economic Analysis?  

If the NRD does not know the cost of the changes, then the NRD does not know if the changes are more expensive than the alternative. Several studies have been done or are being done.  To ignore or remain unaware of their findings will open the NRD to numerous challenges.  

I have made requests for each of the above questions of the NRD Board, the NRD Manager, the DNR, and other NRDs.   As a general rule, these requests for information receive no response, an unfulfilled promise to provide it, or a denial of the answer’s existence.  It is my belief that this NRD does not have most of this information.  It does, however, have the power to obtain the information.  I believe it has a duty to the people it represents to not only obtain the information but to also understand it before making the decisions it is committing the people of the area to as it negotiates with the DNR and other NRDs.  The ability of this NRD to make wise choices as it negotiates is very questionable, if it does not know what the facts are.

 The key question deals with the Well Contribution Factor.  The DNR, at its public presentations, has suggested quick response wells contribute anywhere from 80% to 100% of their pumpage to stream flow depletion.  An analysis of the DNR model runs shows this number to actually be between 20% and 35%.  This difference has an economic impact of between $5,000,000 and $48,000,000.  The DNR has publicly stated that the WCF of an upland well ranges between 11% and 19%.  The Model runs they have released indicate the actual contribution is between .5% and 5%. 

 I am repeatedly told that the WCF does not exist.  I have also been told that even if it could be generated, it would not be accurate.  Yet, it is on this key element that the livelihood of over a thousand jobs will be determined.

 The proposed questions will yield the answers this NRD needs to make informed decisions.  Yes, there are a lot of questions, but most of them are necessary if the NRD wants to make the decisions.   The DNR has employed a staff person for the purpose of running the Model in-house.  This allows the DNR to keep the cost substantially below what it had been costing for past data runs.  Plus, the cost of doing the Model runs is much less than the probable cost of making uninformed decisions.

 If the NRD does not have answers to these questions, then I believe it will lose the ability to make the decisions.  This ability will be taken either by those that understand the facts, the DNR, or the courts.

We ask that the Upper Republican Natural Resource District formally ask the Nebraska Department of Natural Resources and the Republican River Compact to provide the following information in a timely manner:

1)       The official designation of which specific wells are quick response wells, the number of acres associated with those wells, and the historical pumpage (used by the Model) associated with those wells for the past 10 years, totaled by district.

2)       The results from the following Compact Model runs:

a.       One set of runs done for each of the following weather type years: Wet Year, Normal Year, Dry Year.  The data runs should, at minimum, include the actual acres farmed, actual acre feet of water used, total consumptive use by district, contribution to Virgin Water Supply (positive or negative) by district and the partition attributable to the lag affect.  The runs should assume that KS and CO make no reduction in usage.

1)       No wells turned off

2)       All wells turned off

3)       All the wells turned off in the upper but left on in the other districts. 

4)       All the wells turned off in the middle but left on in the other districts.

5)       All the wells turned off in the lower but left on in the other districts.

6)       All Quick Response wells in upper turned off but left on in the other districts.

7)       All Quick Response wells in middle turned off but left on in the other districts.

8)       All Quick Response wells in lower turned off but left on in the other districts.

9)       All Upland wells in upper turned off but left on in the other districts.

10)   All Upland wells in middle turned off but left on in the other districts.

11)   All Upland wells in lower turned off but left on in the other districts.

12)   All wells left on except those between 0 and 1 mile from the stream.

13)   All wells left on except those between 1 and 2 miles from the stream.

14)   All wells left on except those between 2 and 3 miles from the stream.

15)   All wells left on except those between 3 and 4 miles from the stream.

16)   All wells left on except those between 4 and 5 miles from the stream.

1.       Follow pattern out to 10 miles.

17)   All wells turned off except those between 0 and 1 mile from the stream.

3)       The surface water diversions by district for each of the last 10 years.   The allocation given to surface water users by district for the next 10 years.

4)       The following projections

a.       2003, by district, actual usage, allowed usage

b.       2004, by district, projected usage with no wells turned off, allowed usage, assuming wet, normal and a dry year.

c.       2005, by district, projected usage with no wells turned off, allowed usage, assuming wet, normal and a dry year.

d.       2006, by district, projected usage with no wells turned off, allowed usage, assuming wet, normal and a dry year.

e.       2007, by district, projected usage with no wells turned off, allowed usage, assuming wet, normal and a dry year.

1)       Follow pattern out to 2013.

5)       Lag Effect.  All wells turned off for the next 50 years.  Constant weather.  Depletion of stream flow from past pumping on the next 50 years, reported by year.

6)       Any economic impact analyses produced for the Republican River Basin regarding changes in water availability.