|
|
 |
||||||
 |
Going With The Flow Amarillo seeks assurances on water access DUMAS — A decade ago, Mesa Water wanted a guarantee from the White Deer-based Panhandle Groundwater Conservation District that Mesa would be permitted to pump their water at some unspecified time in the future. This time it was the city of Amarillo that was requesting similar guarantees from the Dumas-based North Plains Groundwater Conservation District. Amarillo has about 100,000 acres of water rights in Hartley County. The city has indicated that it does not plan to pump water from there for a number of years. However, at a public hearing on the North Plains Groundwater Conservation District's revised management plan this month, Amarillo Assistant City Manager Jarrett Atkinson told the North Plains board that Amarillo would like some protection for that water in storage and a guarantee that when the city does develop a well field, it will be allowed to pump at the same rate as everyone else in the district. The concern is that as the city tries to store the water for future use, the water will be drained before the city has need of it. Atkinson pointed to the district's database that reports Hartley County uses 303,838 acre-feet of water per year, but the district's data also shows that only 235,522 acre-feet of water are available for use, a deficit of 68,316 acre-feet per year. With the North Plains district rules allowing for the withdrawal of two acre-feet per year, if Amarillo developed a well field in Hartley County, it could pump some 200,000 acre-feet per year, growing the deficit to more than 268,000 acre-feet per year. Amarillo has already filed a lawsuit against Premium Standards Farms, which has water rights next to Amarillo's, for overproduction. At the hearing here, Atkinson suggested a provisional permit to help protect Amarillo's water and guaranteed access to the water at production levels equal to its neighbors. The concern with the North Plains management plan appears to revolve around the depletion allowable of two acre-feet per acre per year as opposed to one acre foot per acre for the neighboring Panhandle Groundwater Conservation District, and North Plains' use of a three-year time period in which six acre-feet of water could be drawn out of the ground. While that is a two acre-foot per year average, a landowner could produce six acre-feet in one year and none the following two years. Such heavy pumping could impact that landowner's neighbors. There has already been a situation where a lessee has overproduced and the landowner may not be able to pump any water for the next two years. The North Plains Groundwater Conservation District has accepted the regional water plan's 50-50 goal to have 50 percent of the groundwater in the district still in storage at the end of 50 years, but related to that is a rate of decline. Neighboring water districts have set a 1.25 percent decline rate as a maximum. There are also concerns that the North Plains district averages out its 50-50 goal over the entire district (if there is no depletion in the eastern end of the district and 100 percent depletion in the western end, that equals 50 percent depletion) while other Panhandle groundwater districts allow for 50 percent depletion on a landowner's contiguous acreage. Danny Krienke of Perryton, the North Plains board president, suggested during discussions that a 1.5 percent decline rate might be appropriate for his district. He also suggested dividing the district into two four-county management areas. The western counties, which are heavily irrigated, use much more ground water while the eastern counties are mostly rangeland. Dallam, Hartley, Moore and Sherman Counties have a decline rate of 1.45 percent. Hansford, Hutchinson, Lipscomb and Ochiltree Counties have a decline rate of 0.41 percent. Krienke said that 90 percent of the use of water in the North Plains district was for agriculture, but he noted that 90 percent of the water in Roberts County, part of the Panhandle Groundwater Conservation District, was committed to municipal use, primarily Mesa, the Canadian River Municipal Water Authority and the City of Amarillo. Following the hearing, a representative of Mesa expressed a concern that the district appeared to be tilting in favor of the corn farmers in the western part of the North Plains district. Mesa has water rights in Lipscomb County at the eastern end of the district. Krienke said that any decision on adopting the revised water management plan would be tabled until the district's February meeting. E-mail
comments about this story Posted: January 24, 2008
|
|
