Kansas unlikely to be satisfied with water efforts

Monday, July 30, 2007

We've shut off irrigation on thousands of acres, purchased water to send down the Republican River, enacted a new tax on irrigated land and on all property in the area as well.

Nebraska also has plans to spend millions of dollars to remove trees and other vegetation that use up water along the river as part of LB701, the comprehensive bill to bring Nebraska into compliance with the Republican River Compact.

Surely we've done enough to convince Kansas we're trying to do that?

Don't count on it.

"We want water," said David Barfield, acting chief engineer for the Kansas Division of Water Resources. "We don't want plans or possibilities or whatever. We want water."

Cutting down trees is a "grand idea, but it doesn't necessarily send water to Kansas," Barfield said.

At a meeting in August of the Republican River Compact Administration, Nebraska is likely to be found to have been out of compliance for the last two years, and possibly three of the last five.

The drought was the most obvious cause of the problem, of course, but a head-in-the-sand attitude for the last half-century or more was the underlying source of the crisis. Under the mistaken expectation that surface water wouldn't be linked with groundwater, pump irrigation was expanded unchecked.

As a result of our own failure to act in a timely manner, we're in danger of losing control of our own economic future.

LB701 was a good start, but we'll need to do more before Kansas is satisfied.

View 3 comments
Note: The nature of the Internet makes it impractical for our staff to review every comment. Please note that those who post comments on this website may do so using a screen name, which may or may not reflect a website user's actual name. Readers should be careful not to assign comments to real people who may have names similar to screen names. Refrain from obscenity in your comments, and to keep discussions civil, don't say anything in a way your grandmother would be ashamed to read.
  • Just for the heck of it, can you answer one simple question? Just what would happen if our friends and neighbors in Nebraska just decided that enough was too much and didn't send one additional drop of water to Kansas? What would some politician do in retaliation?? Would they decide that an economic boycot was in order? Would they sue? To whom and what for?

    I guess that my point is that agreement isn't worth the paper it's printed on nor the water to moisten a stamp to mail it. It is a gentleman's agreement which is not being recognized as such by Kansas and therefore places no obligation on Nebraska.

    To take water from one that carefully husbands all its assets and give it to someone who has no concept of conservation ans so suffers from flood and drought cyles annually is criminal.

    -- Posted by everett on Tue, Jul 31, 2007, at 9:47 AM
  • AMEN!

    -- Posted by nonnorboy on Tue, Jul 31, 2007, at 9:37 PM
  • Who or what is a David Barfield? People in Hell want icewater and people in jail want out.

    -- Posted by everett on Wed, Aug 1, 2007, at 11:35 AM
Respond to this story

Posting a comment requires free registration: