Ithaca 37
New member
Here's a great explanation of water rights! And it's interesting that the conservative agriculture industry wants even MORE welfare now.
"Wait a minute. Let me see if I have a few things right. The state is looking for money to pay to junior water users — particularly those over the Snake River Plain Aquifer.
There are certain givens about water and water law that should be acknowledged:
1. Surface and ground water systems are related. Confined aquifers somewhat confound this notion; however, models used to understand most relationships between surface and ground water should be three-dimensional.
2. Practices by water users have diminished recharge to the Snake River aquifer.
3. Water is a finite resource.
4. We've been mining underground reserves of fresh water in Idaho for years.
5. Appropriation Doctrine is the system Idaho uses. This "first-in-time-first-in-right" concept of water appropriation and allocation is controlled by the executive branch of the state of Idaho — the Idaho Department of Water Resources — via a Water Board.
6. Junior users (later in time) must get their water last — that is, after senior users are assured of filling their water right.
7. The system has some serious flaws — it allows for "overappropriation," leads to water mining (depletion of groundwater aquifers), and causes surface waters to diminish in discharge.
All of this is old news, but recently there has been some real news about the senior users in the Hagerman area and junior users elsewhere. All of a sudden this old news is "real news." After several years of drought, senior water users in the Hagerman area are calling for their water rights, but the flows at Thousand Springs — water from the Snake River Aquifer — are diminished. Junior users are now required to forgo water use so that senior users can get their water.
There is a problem, of course. Appropriation Doctrine assumes a surface water source. In that simple case, a junior user ceases to divert flows so that a senior user downstream would receive his or her water. It does not necessarily work that way in the case of the Snake River Aquifer. But a discussion of ground water hydrology is not my purpose here.
Water rights holders must have known that there is a "buyer-beware" aspect to filing for and using a water right. There was and is the possibility that the water will at times not be there. I'm concerned that there is a perception that junior users are owed something.
They have a water right. The water is not there. Senior users have a first-in-time right to it, according to the way Appropriation Doctrine works. Water users know that. If water users want to toss some money into a pool for the junior users, that's one thing. It does not affect me. I don't have a water right — directly. But as a taxpayer, I don't think I owe a junior user anything. They don't owe me anything either, so we're even. I don't think the state of Idaho should subsidize junior water users who don't get "their water" in drought years.
My overall point here is that while it may not have been intended, apparently we've created a system in which handouts are now expected. I find that amusing in this mostly conservative state, because liberals are usually charged with wanting to do that kind of thing.
Like most folks, I'd like to see the problem resolved, but there was a time when water rights were given out like there was no end of water availability in sight. Now we are there. Actually it's, as I say, "old news." We've been "there" for years."
Roy Heberger of Boise has degrees in forestry, fishery biology, and aquatic ecology and is retired after many years of fish and wildlife service.
http://www.idahostatesman.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20041005/NEWS0503/410050310/1052/NEWS05
"Wait a minute. Let me see if I have a few things right. The state is looking for money to pay to junior water users — particularly those over the Snake River Plain Aquifer.
There are certain givens about water and water law that should be acknowledged:
1. Surface and ground water systems are related. Confined aquifers somewhat confound this notion; however, models used to understand most relationships between surface and ground water should be three-dimensional.
2. Practices by water users have diminished recharge to the Snake River aquifer.
3. Water is a finite resource.
4. We've been mining underground reserves of fresh water in Idaho for years.
5. Appropriation Doctrine is the system Idaho uses. This "first-in-time-first-in-right" concept of water appropriation and allocation is controlled by the executive branch of the state of Idaho — the Idaho Department of Water Resources — via a Water Board.
6. Junior users (later in time) must get their water last — that is, after senior users are assured of filling their water right.
7. The system has some serious flaws — it allows for "overappropriation," leads to water mining (depletion of groundwater aquifers), and causes surface waters to diminish in discharge.
All of this is old news, but recently there has been some real news about the senior users in the Hagerman area and junior users elsewhere. All of a sudden this old news is "real news." After several years of drought, senior water users in the Hagerman area are calling for their water rights, but the flows at Thousand Springs — water from the Snake River Aquifer — are diminished. Junior users are now required to forgo water use so that senior users can get their water.
There is a problem, of course. Appropriation Doctrine assumes a surface water source. In that simple case, a junior user ceases to divert flows so that a senior user downstream would receive his or her water. It does not necessarily work that way in the case of the Snake River Aquifer. But a discussion of ground water hydrology is not my purpose here.
Water rights holders must have known that there is a "buyer-beware" aspect to filing for and using a water right. There was and is the possibility that the water will at times not be there. I'm concerned that there is a perception that junior users are owed something.
They have a water right. The water is not there. Senior users have a first-in-time right to it, according to the way Appropriation Doctrine works. Water users know that. If water users want to toss some money into a pool for the junior users, that's one thing. It does not affect me. I don't have a water right — directly. But as a taxpayer, I don't think I owe a junior user anything. They don't owe me anything either, so we're even. I don't think the state of Idaho should subsidize junior water users who don't get "their water" in drought years.
My overall point here is that while it may not have been intended, apparently we've created a system in which handouts are now expected. I find that amusing in this mostly conservative state, because liberals are usually charged with wanting to do that kind of thing.
Like most folks, I'd like to see the problem resolved, but there was a time when water rights were given out like there was no end of water availability in sight. Now we are there. Actually it's, as I say, "old news." We've been "there" for years."
Roy Heberger of Boise has degrees in forestry, fishery biology, and aquatic ecology and is retired after many years of fish and wildlife service.
http://www.idahostatesman.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20041005/NEWS0503/410050310/1052/NEWS05
