Precedent set

Dear Editor,

The amount of irrigated acres that will be shut down because groundwater pumping is counted as Beneficial Consumptive Use is just the tip of the iceberg. The precedent that it sets will have a far more damaging effect. The compact states are currently doing a study on the effects that conservation and farming practices have on stream flows. The compact states have elected at this time not to count this use as beneficial consumptive use.

When Kansas sues Nebraska to also count this as Beneficial Consumptive Use, how will the courts rule? Notice the similarities; both are activities of man that deplete stream flows. There is a big difference between the two in the amount of beneficial consumptive use that they will use up.

When you pump groundwater, the amount of stream flow depletion is a fraction of the amount pumped. The amount of water conservation and farming practices keeps the the streams are like a direct diversion, the entire amount will be counted as Beneficial Consumptive Use.

When the entire allocated Beneficial Consumptive Use for Nebraska is used up by the Beneficial Consumptive Use for conservation and farming practices, all irrigation will be shut down.

The courts are being used to legally steal the water rights of irrigators.

The precedent has been set!

Dale Helms,

Holbrook