It’s too bad if it has to come to that, but Kansas is justified in threatening to sue Nebraska unless it cuts it water use and pays millions of dollars for the water it took. Per a 2003 decree from the U.S. Supreme Court, Nebraska was supposed to restrict the amount of water pumped from the Republican River basin, but it is having trouble getting local irrigators to comply. As a result, Kansas calculates that in 2005 and 2006, Nebraska took 27 billion gallons more water than allowed — or enough to supply a city of 100,000 for 10 years.
Posted by Phillip Brownlee
Registered?
Commenting on WE Blog now requires you to be a Kansas.com member. Use the links above to register, if you haven't already, or to log in.Contact us
Follow us
Daily Archives
-
Recent Comments
- CapnAmerica on Too many exemptions
- Monkeyhawk on Open thread 11/23
- CapnAmerica on Too many exemptions
- Heckler on Open thread 11/23
- Monkeyhawk on Open thread 11/23
- Pleefer on Open thread 11/23
- CapnAmerica on Too many exemptions
- CapnAmerica on Too many exemptions
- Heckler on Open thread 11/23
- CapnAmerica on Too many exemptions
23 Comments
Ethanol
Well since it is “The Republican River Basin”, I can only assume nothing good can come out of it anyway so let Nebraska have it. I will drink from the Democratic River Basin
“..enough to supply a city of 100,000 for 10 years.” Nuts! If Kansas got the water it would be used by farmers growing more crops to get more federal money. If we sue Nebraska, get money, the hell with the water. No city would ever see it.
A lawsuit needs to be filed by the Attorney General for the state. This was successful vs. Colorado and is the only recourse to end this theft of water.
It’s a little game we play. The states of Colorado and Nebraska use the Arkansas River and Republican (Kansas) river waters that should pass from or through their states to Kansas.
Then, with lots of publicity, the Kansas attorney general sues his friends, the attorney generals of Colorado and Nebraska for some amount less than the real value of the water taken.
Eventually, after the law suits are settled … the “dirty” money is used by the Kansas governor for excessive travel or remodeling of the state capital building.
And each year by Christmas, all parties to the great Kansas rivers shell game are grinning and celebrating the annual Kansas water solution.
Wasn’t there a big law suit settled not too long ago with Colorado?
Whatever became of that money?
The last thing we need is a bunch of Nebraskans without pants.
The reality is states using our water are doing so because of this ethanol crap. 1800 gallons of water per gallon of ethanol. Now there’s something to think about, unless, of course, you’ve got your head in the sand.
Bettter get special counsel for the suit. I think the AG’s office will be busy with “other matters” for quite a while…
You are correct of course, about ethanol, and the irrigated grain it needs to survive.
And the sheeple sleep…
American Way, you are correct; once the water is gone, money isn’t going to bring it back.
In addition to not growing irrigated crops, may I suggest that a disincentive be provided to discourage growth of various plants, grasses, etc., in urban areas that require a great deal of water to survive. I don’t know how many folks still attempt to have a bluegrass lawn, e.g., but in Kansas, this makes no sense. I feel the same about certain other lawns, fescue being one.
I’m not a big government intervention person, but given the increasing demand on potable water, which is a depleting resource around here, perhaps consideration of zoning or other regulations proscribing certain grasses, etc. should be had. While buffalo grass may not be pretty throughout the spring, summer and fall, it may certainly survive on rainfall, without additional watering. Just one thought.
The essence of conservatism says…
We just happen to live downstream.
To whit, the water is “theirs” before it gets to us.
If we think we have some right to the runoff from Nebraska and Colorado, well we best be showing our best to preserve the water we have and the water we get.
Well we are not doing that.
J R, actually there are many pacts between the three states:http://cwcb.state.co.us/WaterSupply/pubs/Compact_Facts.pdf
The following is my opinion:
There is a water crisis, not only in the more arid portions of Kansas, but world wide. The causes of this are many, including but not limited to population growth; industrialization; and climate change. This crisis will make the “energy crisis” pale by comparison, and will (again IMHO) present a national security problem for darn near every nation, not just the U.S.
While there are alternatives to carbon based energy, the same have not been developed and exploited to date. I’m unaware of alternatives to water (when I use the term “water”, generally I’m referring to potable water). Desalinization is an option, but I’ve wondered a) where does the extracted salt go; b) how to transport the same to areas of need at a reasonable cost.
At present, efficient use of existing water supplies (including conservation) seems the best short term solution to me. Use of “gray water” in situations such as irrigation of lawns, gardens, toilet flushing, would be helpful. Capturing rain runoff into cisterns could provide a source of water for gardens, etc. as well.
Just a few meandering thoughts and opinions.
still attempt to have a bluegrass lawn, e.g., but in Kansas, this makes no sense.
Vaughn I’m smiling as I think of the years of toil and money I have put into my attempt to have a golf course looking blue grass lawn. I’ve tried variety after variety. I’ve watered, I’ve let it go dormant (which ended up being so dormant it was dead). I’ve verticut, dethatchers, reseeded, overseeded. I hate to think of what I’ve invested in fertilizer – and my water bill.
So I’m now a tall fescue fan. And if this latest doesn’t work – I may just put down concrete and paint it green.
There are some darker blue tall fescue varieties with rhizomes and good drought tolerence.
Will know for sure in one season. I have watered my last lawn.
Forget keeping up with the Jones. They are not paying my water bill!
American Way, thank you for your experience which, IMO, proves my point. I hope the tall fescue to which you refer works out. The concrete painted green is a concept I’ve explored as well, due to my allergies, but that’s another thread at another time. The only problems are the heat build up and water run off, but these seem a reasonable trade for relief from the respiratory and skin reactions I have when dealing with grasses. :-)
A few years ago, I recall seeing on “Hometime” a discussion of a grass hybrid that required little to no water other than the naturally occurring rain, and grew so slowly it required mowing only two to three times a season. I do not recall hearing anything subsequent that indicated how successful this was. If that type of hybrid could be grown in a climate such as ours, it would allow for conservation of water, and by reducing mowings, conservation of petroleum (unless one was using the “old” push type reel mower for the good exercise use of such provides).
Absolutely proves your point. So not only could I have saved my money and the environment – I could have been fishing instead of mowing!!!
I had two children who we had evaluated for allergies. In those days, they stuck what looked like a few hundred needles in their skin to see which allergins they reacted too.
Both came up allergic to nearly everything (family gene). Among the items was grass pollen and dust mites.
Both attempted to use their medical condition to the extreme in avoidance of chores. Didn’t work. They both mowed the lawn, raked leaves, did field work – and when they were done: vacumed the house for their mother!
Their sibling thought I was being a very fair father during those trying times. ;-)
Will know for sure in one season. I have watered my last lawnPosted by: American Way
Agrees. God waters my lawn when he feels a need. He washes my car, too. And when the inside needs a washing he conveniently neglects to remind me to roll up the windows.Vaughn Tolle pointed out the water crisis. Can’t help but wonder…Ice sheets melting creating water vapor (greenhouse gas) causing more rain that runs off the land leaching salts on it’s way to the ocean where it becomes non-potable and raises levels. Aquifers being depleted for agriculture that eventually ends up in the atmosphere causing same extra rain/leaching/filling of oceans.Ya think they’d be able to drill holes (suitably filtered) wherever two hills merged over the aquifers and ameliorate several problems at once.
Well then stumper we should just outlaw corn as it takes 1700 gallons of water to grow enough corn for a gallon of ethanol. Processing the corn into ethanol is anywhere from 3-18 gallons of water depending on who you believe.
Approximately half ot the Republican River drainage basin either originates in or passes through Kansas.
Thus, Kansas has an option that was not available in the dispute over water in the Arkansas river. We can deny the water to Nebraska in the first place.
There is already a dam on Prairie Dog Creek at Norton. Kansas could divert the creek into the Solomon River by pumping the water just a few miles.
Depending on how many acres of land, cities, and scenery we’re willing to sacrifice, we could divert most of the flow from Sappo Creek, Beaver Creek, and even the South Fork of the Republican River itself.
Of course, then we would probably have some power company come in and want to build a coal-fired power plant near Norton, so they could convert the water into electricity and send it back into Nebraska, similar to the way Sunflower wants to send the Arkansas River back to Colorado with its plant at Holcomb.
So I’ve got an even “better” idea… Build even more dams, as close to the top of the drainage divide as we can get. Build a bunch of wind turbines, too. Use the wind turbines to pump water uphill when the wind is blowing, use the stored water to generate hydroelectric power when the wind’s not blowing. Sell the power to Nebraska and Colorado, and keep the water in Kansas.
“Well then stumper we should just outlaw corn as it takes 1700 gallons of water to grow enough corn for a gallon of ethanol. Processing the corn into ethanol is anywhere from 3-18 gallons of water depending on who you believe.”
Posted by bs.
No, we should keep growing corn for food, not ethanol. Actually, we should be looking at some of the crops that do not need as much water to convert to ethanol, if we’re going to stay on this ethanol train to nowhere.
Good points VT. One of the big reasons for the India-Pakistan fight over Kashmir is that Kashmis sits on the headwaters of the Indus. Also, in Palestine Israel has appropriated to itself almost all the water resources of the West Bank.
Many years ago Prime Minister Ozal of Turkey predicted that the next bid MidEast war would be over water. Think of the implications if Jordan, Lebanon and Syria were to block the tributaries to the Jordan River.
VT – I think you are referring to Buffalo grass.
Ben, the hybrid to which I made reference was not “Buffalo grass”; rather it was some form of a short fescue, as memory serves, that was experimental at the time.
Here in Kansas, were I Czar, Buffalo grass would be the only grass permitted in lawns. :-)