Now
Light Rain
86°
High
91°
Low
73°

Efforts to restrict irrigation make no sense

Text Size: 
Tools Sponsor

BY DON ADAMS

Monday, Sep 03, 2007 - 12:12:10 am CDT

As harvest time nears, we need to be reminded of our heritage.

Some 100 years ago, before there was irrigation, Nebraska was an uninhabitable wasteland … a stretch of land that pioneers had to cross to get to the West. As irrigation was developed during the early 20th century, Nebraska was transformed from a desert into an oasis, and when groundwater irrigation became viable and grew during the mid-1900s, Nebraska became a world-class powerhouse producer of food. No other endeavor under the sun is more important to mankind.

Today, irrigated agriculture generates and injects about $5 billion every year into our state’s economy. It is important to understand that these dollars represent new wealth, not recycled wealth. These new dollars churn through the local and state economies and multiply. These dollars built and now sustain communities, schools and infrastructures throughout our state. One out of every three jobs in Nebraska is derived from irrigated agriculture.

In the world, there are producers and there are consumers. Nebraska farmers and ranchers are producers. Those of us in Lincoln, Omaha, New York, Los Angeles, etc., are the consumers. Lawyers, doctors, insurance salesmen, teachers, bus drivers, government workers and others do good work and provide useful services that contribute greatly to our quality of life, but they are not producers, they are consumers.

We consume that which irrigation allows our farmers and ranchers to produce. In fact, to feed one adult for just one day requires 1,700 gallons of water. Thanks to irrigation, we consumers are able to enjoy the highest quality and cheapest food in the world.

It makes absolutely no sense for our government to impede our producers by restricting their use of irrigation. Do we want to end up importing all our food from foreign countries? Haven’t we learned the perils of this approach from our nearly total reliance on foreign oil? Now more than ever, our national security demands that we maintain and actually expand our food production. Our producers’ ability to operate with minimal government interference should be our state’s public policy priority.

We are bombarded with editorials that say we have major water problems caused by irrigation. Such, in fact, is not the case. Our problems with Kansas are the direct result of an outdated compact entered into by government bureaucrats 60 years ago. The compact was never once amended to deal with the changing times. The dispute with Kansas is political, technical and academic. It is not about a water shortage problem.

The Republican River begins in the northwestern-most part of Kansas. Harlan County Reservoir, near Alma, Neb., is the measuring stick for compact compliance. Right now about 500,000 acre feet of water is being held back from flowing into Harlan by terraces in northwest Kansas. This fact explains why Harlan is so hard to fill. Kansas is impeding the natural flow and blaming Nebraska.

The problem in the Platte River basin is a direct result, not of excessive irrigation, but a severe seven-year drought and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) coming in and forcing its will and agenda of control of Platte River flows for highly suspect habitat needs for certain birds and a fish. Again, the issue was not caused by irrigation, but rather by the federal government and our state government, which caved in to FWS threats.

Every year we allow about 9 million acre feet of water to flow out of our state and into the Gulf of Mexico, where it ends up as useless saltwater. Incredibly, about 90 million acre feet of water in the form of precipitation falls onto our state every year. This huge annual amount of water is enough to fill up 45 Lake McConaughys and Harlan County Reservoirs.

We do not have a water shortage problem in our state. We do have a water storage and management problem that, if addressed through the construction of additional storage facilities, would provide us with an abundance of water that could be stored and used in times of drought.  Inter-basin transfers of our surplus water into the Republican would resolve the conflict with Kansas.

To generate $5 billion every year for our state’s economy, groundwater irrigators use less than 10 percent, or 8 million acre feet, of the 90 million acre feet that we get annually. What a value!

The contribution irrigation makes to our state is beyond measure.

Don Adams is executive director of Nebraskans First, a nonprofit, nonpartisan, grass-roots organization of Nebraska farmers dedicated to protecting Nebraska’s groundwater for agriculture.


$1 Sunday Delivery - Subscribe Today!
Columns > Back to Top of Story

All posts to JournalStar.com are subject to our Terms and Standards.
Your posted comment will appear after it has been approved.
Frequently asked questions about story commenting.
(optional)
   
Hjalmer wrote on September 3, 2007 8:29 am:
" Truly a short sighted view of water. I guess if water isn't used to grow corn, it's wasted. Since when is using a natural resource in the most conservative, efficient way, poor policy? Fish, wildlife habitat, recreation are necessities to sustain life. Nebraskans have a hard time grasping the changing economic values. A huge transition is taking place in the mountain states. In the past, the only way to extract value from that land was to farm it, graze it, log it, or mine it. Today, there's more value to gained by just selling the opportunity to look at it. It's called tourism and recreational value. Growing corn isn't the ONLY way to add value. "

russell wrote on September 3, 2007 8:38 am:
" Your statements about who are consumers and who are producers is very accurate. Our society is very adept at forgetting who is the dog and who is the tail and who wags what! The 'service industry' quickly forgets what feeds them: production line and farm employees. That can be seen in the wage scale difference between CEO's and production line employees. It has always puzzled me as to what a person does that adds $1,000 worth of value to a company every day and yet that is what many consumers get paid. "

Homesteader wrote on September 3, 2007 11:02 am:
" Once again, Nebraska agriculture talking out of both sides of its mouth. Bashing the federal government while taking farm subsidies. "

Husker55 wrote on September 3, 2007 3:17 pm:
" I always find it curious that some farmers consider themselves the only producers and everyone except themselves as consumers. Farmers "consume" more water than anyone else in Nebraska -- by far. They consume other natural resources, too, without replenishing them. They consume chemicals, natural gas, oil/gasoline, clothing, machinery, cell phones, automobiles, corrective eyewear, dental services, paper, computers, pens/ink, shampoo, soap, etc., etc., etc. -- none of which they "produce." Mr. Adams is about as extreme as you can get on the issue of irrigation and water consumption. "

Big Chief wrote on September 3, 2007 5:00 pm:
" When pure, clean underground water can be replaced with pure clean water that can be put back undergrouind then I might be in favor of the irrigation levels that Don Adams wants. It took centuries to get that underground water in place and in just a few decades it will be gone if we aren't careful. "

cit wrote on September 3, 2007 5:55 pm:
" Nebraskans First - ALL Nebraskans! We are ALL consumers and producers of something. Irrigators are also consumers! We don't just bow to the "producers!" Turn the spigot down Mr. Adams. This is about our water - water for ALL Nebraskans not just those who grow crops! Selfishness already got us in trouble with Kansas. Now you want more? Shame, shame on you. "

whatever wrote on September 3, 2007 7:59 pm:
" Mr. Adams, my God aren't you smarter than this. I'm just a poor old Nebraska citizen, but I can tell you more about this state and the water problems in your area and I don't even know where you live. "

Jas wrote on September 3, 2007 9:45 pm:
" yes hjalmer, we'll all just voluntarily give up generations of sweat and work to become hunting guides and open joke-cherry jam shacks on the roadside just so you can drive through once a year (maybe) on your way to the mountains for a ski trip and think, "aww how 'sustainable' and romantic". Afterall, consumers couldn't possibly consume the water used to grow the corn when they consume the myriad of products PRODUCED from corn or when they eat steak or hamburger or roast or chicken or turkey or pork fed the corn PRODUCED with the water pumped from the aquifer. You couldn't possibly just by your very existence and the goods that you consume through your conspicous consumption be just as part of the problem as the farmer who starts the engine to irrigate his field of CORN!!! "

cat wrote on September 3, 2007 10:01 pm:
" I would be interested in knowing the source of this statistic: "to feed one adult for just one day requires 1,700 gallons of water. " If this is true it is incredibly wasteful and not sustainable and contradicts your next assertion: "Thanks to irrigation, we consumers are able to enjoy the highest quality and cheapest food in the world." This kind of commentary is so biased and incorrect that I do wonder why it appears in the newspaper. It should not go unchallenged. "

Roger Welsch wrote on September 4, 2007 8:17 am:
" Adams reveals the depths of his ignorance in an amazing economy of words here. My favorite though is the cockamammy notion that all those Indians who lived and prospered here with their crops and villages were too dumb to realize they were living in a "uninhabitable wasteland!" Please someone, explain to Don Adams what "uninhabitable" means. All my Indian friends are grateful to Mr. Adams and his ilk for coming along and revealing the truth of what a miserable place this was without him, then showing them the one-way path to the Oklahoma Gardenlands. Folks, we are all for irrigation. But there's a big difference between careful stewardship of our resources and profligate squandering of a limited supply. Take it from me, they are NOT going to invent a substitute for water! "

Ted wrote on September 4, 2007 8:35 am:
" Ok, just who is the dog and who is the tail? Considering his utter dependence on petroleum products, big machinery, seed, fertilizer, the consumer, and our publicly owned water supply, just to mention a few, the farmer might just be the ultimate tail! "

Whiny farmer welfare queens! wrote on September 4, 2007 10:46 am:
" Corn grows in plenty of places. There's nothing magical about it having to come from a specific place requiring extensive irrigation just because somebody's greatgrand-daddy started doing it. Why is it that farmers think they should have a guaranteed income regardless of how inefficient and ineffective their land use is? Nobody has a right to the same job as their "pappy" and the arrogant "we feed you and you need us" line seems to forget that I can buy corn and corn-derived products from anywhere. If Nebraska farmers cannot compete then those in that indeustry need to find new sources of income where they can be efficient rather than sucking from the government teat. "

Neighbor wrote on September 4, 2007 11:08 am:
" When is this idiot going to stop being given forums for his nonsensical comments? Adams is an expert at making arguments that sound sort of reasonable until you dig through and find the virtually complete lack of facts. This causes the non-technically educated reader and listener to be fooled into thinking Adams is right. Please stop publishing his manipulative and wrongheaded opinions. "

Roger Welsch wrote on September 4, 2007 2:03 pm:
" We may have mis-read Adams. Maybe what he meant to say is that it takes 17,000 gallons of water per person per day to FUEL America. How much of our precious and irreplacable water supplies are being squandered to make fuel for SUVs, AVs, and ATVs. I think this "feed the world" nonsense is just so much more baloney from the ME FIRSTERs "

Sylvia wrote on September 4, 2007 2:10 pm:
" If the state wants to limit the water used by farmers to irrigate, they should first ENFORCE the limits on the water used by concentrated animal feeding facilities, ethanol plants, and residential non-crop irrigation. The state has done a terrible job managing and enforcing existing laws and statutes. "

Fishy wrote on September 4, 2007 7:16 pm:
" Mr. Adams should realize that agriculture and industry uses over ninety percent of the water in Nebraska. The family farm is broke and the only farmers left in the majority are corporate farmers who want the nebraska citizens to foot the bill for their profits with cheap water subsidized by taxpayers. Hopefully people will realize what and who this person represents and contact their elected officials and let them know what Nebraska really needs. We need to have clean water for everyones use, conserved not wasted and everyone paying their fair share for the water they use. People need to stop polluting and wasting water. Has anyone spent some time outdoors at any of the lakes or rivers in our state? Take some time and check one out. There are very few that do not have water quality issues and many of these conditions can be related to agricultural runoff. "

K wrote on September 4, 2007 10:38 pm:
" Perhaps fishy can name one country on earth in which agriculture does not "use" 90% of the water. Does he not "consume" water when he eats a hamburger at Burger King? "

Look wrote on September 5, 2007 12:11 am:
" around and see that Mr. Adams is right about a few things. The only real and reneewable wealth in this state looks like corn or stinks like livestock. All of the rest of us just exchange this for that. Water, soil, and sunshine create renewable wealth but how long for irrigatred crops? If seed technology does not keep up when we change from an irrigated agriculture to trusting mother nature this state will become a wasteland of consumers and traders and totally dependant on some one else to meter our food as well as our water. Policy makers have failed miserably on the water issue in Nebraska. Please, someone, tell me one thing about water law that is better than 20 years ago? Just keep pumping until it's gone and move on, I guess. Norman Rockwell farming is long gone and the farmers are businessmen. When policy changes they will make business decisions to adjust or go out of business. The real ignorance in this state is a lack of recognition that this states economy is farming, ranching, and livestock production. We are geographically challenged, and therefore freight expense challenged, to be much else. As for Mr. Roger Welsch: The pot is calling the kettle black. I really don't give a hoot about Indian agriculture from 150 years ago. Their civilization perished in spite of being surrounded by wealth. Poor business management, I conclude. "

AB wrote on September 5, 2007 1:05 am:
" Perhaps the most ignorant thing I have read in the last month. There is TROUBLE coming our way, and it sure would be nice if we saved just a little bit of the aquifer to deal with it. It took an awful long time to fill up, and we drained it in no time (in relative terms). I suppose oil is a limitless and consequence-free resource too? Wow. "

Husker55 wrote on September 5, 2007 12:08 pm:
" Now let me get this straight, LOOK: Don Adams calls this area an "uninhabitable wasteland" back in the 19th century yet you say the Pawnee were "surrounded by wealth"? You guys need to get your stories straight before you rant in public forums. If corn and big livestock operations are all the wealth that Nebraska offers, then I guess all those people in Omaha, Lincoln, etc., are just here for the fresh air. Why aren't they grazing cattle in their back yards? Also, you say the Pawnee couldn't survive because of "poor business management"? As I recall, the Pawnee and other tribes did just fine on the Great Plains for centuries. With any luck, though, groundwater irrigators in the dry parts of Nebraska will be gone in a couple decades. Poor business management, I guess. "

Jim Kunz wrote on September 5, 2007 12:38 pm:
" Farmers are getting better about irrigation timing and not over applying. With the technologies we have coming down the pipeline such as drought tolerant crops this will lessen the water use. As far as polluted waters in this state there are a few creeks and streams that are polluted its nowhere near the scale of rivers near larger cities. And I can think of no lakes around with water quality issues, except those near golf courses where runoff causes the toxic blue green algae. "

whatever wrote on September 5, 2007 9:31 pm:
" I've posted this before and here it is again. Anyone remember the water park in Beaver Crossing? Right down by the ball field and city park. Umm, wonder what happened to it. Mr. Adams do you have an explanation? Could someone else tell me why the Platte River at Columbus, up until this year with incredible amounts of rain, has been dry the last few years? Why is Big Mac low. Why the lawsuits in the panhandle regarding dried up creeks due to irrigation? This year has been a good year for rain, I've had 30 inches since the first of July at my place, but that ain't gonna happen every year and we STILL have low water tables. Come on Mr. Adams I'm waiting for the explanation. "

cit wrote on September 6, 2007 7:34 am:
" Mr. Kunz - There are lakes right here in Lancaster County - in RURAL areas who have been impacted by the toxic algae and other water quality issues. Pawnee Lake (currently) and Conestoga (in the past). These lakes aer surrounded by fields, not golf courses. I can't think of one in Lincoln or bordering Lincoln with a golf course that's been on the toxic blue algae warning list. "