Government committee to look into aquifer regulation

Farmers are insulted by people who complain when they don't know the facts. You may not like the information, it may not change your mind but it is the truth and the reality.

Sorry if I did not wrap it up in a pretty bow.

__________________

Understood that is the law and probably this is all academic as I would be surprised the SCOTUS has not ruled in favor of the status quo, but I still don't understand the principle.

I can understand how I could lose the rights to unlimited water from an aquifer or large lake because it is a shared resource subject to common good regulations of the sort gov't was intended to govern. But I don't understand how I can sell the rights to future use of something I don't own, specifically rainfall.

And likewise, I don't understand foolish gov't regulation that is counter to the common good. If I create swales and plant them with trees that capture rainfall, everyone benefits. Water and soil quality and retention, aquifer recharge, the immediate micro climate, wildlife opportunities, food production, all are improved. But I'm fairly sure I'm tilting at the same windmills that require me to install a septic system for new home construction when everything that gets flushed would be put to far better use in a compost pile and then garden.

I'm not saying you don't understand the current system, but You have it backwards when you understand rights except under the current "progressive," big gov't definition of rights where people have rights to the possessions of others...like healthcare being a right that others must pay for.

I can't sell you my rights to rainfall because I don't and can't own the rain. Somewhere along the line, those with the power of votes seem to have corrupted the system you now endorse.

You endorse wasteful and unnecessary practices that were developed during a time when oil was cheap and the aquifers were boundless. You can have your food production without center pivots, ask the Israelis.

There are lots of things that we sell the future use of. Water in the lake and aquifer is just that as well. If it rains enough they get that water. The land people buy with no water rights is cheaper and it is up to the buyer to know that. They buy it knowing they Don,t have more than an acres right to irrigation water and no right to store or divert surface water. Life in Wyoming depends on that.

__________________

Big Ag, like many industries and people, does not like change. Change is coming because imprudent uses of the will force change, either now or later when the resource dries up. That may not change your mind, but it is the truth and the reality.

But I will agree with you that 3 acre irrigated lawns are also a foolish waste and unsustainable. I just signed a contract for a farm that has a 40 acre irrigated lawn that requires a full time groundskeeper. We have LOTS of water here, but it is a crazy waste that I will not continue.

Agreed to that snippet. But of course, you responded to only a part of the sentence and left out the critical part.

Big Ag does change but yes sometimes some of them need pushing. We live season to season here. Water is never a certainty. 1/2 the fields are dry farms where I am. That means you plant one crop and the only water it gets is rain. No irrigation or water storage. You get what you get. They know just how precious the fields they can irrigate are. They work hard to make that water go far.

__________________

The committee on this is not going to have any impact on that, therefore it has no bearing on what the laws and rights are now. The comittee is only addressesing the shortage in that county and how they can plan for the future. Wyoming water rights seem bizzare to people that do not live under the conditions we do. That part was not critical to me. I know my rights and live within them.

__________________

Not if they are using center pivots.

And those in the desert southwest cast an eye towards the Great Lakes, too.

__________________
Roger

We still have some using flood irrigation. Pivot is a big step up and each step takes money. Drip is not cost effective compared to Pivot . Prices on the crops here will not support it.

__________________

You can sell your rights in about anything. The future is all you ever sell your rights to. !

once again, you have to read the whole sentence to understand the point

You must mean the part about you can't own the rainfall ? I'm afraid you are wrong. It's a pretty settled issue.

Drip installation cost per acre is about 10% greater per acre than pivot. Annual maintenance s about 10% less per acre with drip. Cost of water and pumping is hugely less with drip. This is per NDSU. Do you have data to back up your claim or is your claim like 76.3% of internet statistics and simply made up?

Pivot is not a step up, it is a step backwards in an area of scarce water.

KNot so simple. Lots more factors than just operating costs and maintenance costs. Drip does not help newly planted crops as much as pivot , buried too deep. Pivots can be moved from field to field so up front cost can be less. Changing over from lines and pivot is a huge capital cost.

Farmers have to be able to absorb the cost of change over before moving on to newer tech.

You also do not lose a crop when pivot goes bad because you do not have to dig up the field to find the bad drip lines

__________________

All I can glean from this conversation is don't move to Wyoming, or anywhere that you don't own whats naturally on your land. The timber, the minerals, the water. The land aint much good without them.

Luckily they haven't found a way to claim all the sunshine yet, or they'd have us paying them for that too ( and probably will at some point ).

Just to throw a wrench into things. Did you know that often as a farmer invests in more water conserving tech they still use the same amount of water? They just plant crops that use more water and give higher returns. Crops they could not plant before. They own the right to a certain amount of water and if they do not use it they lose it.

__________________

Another tidbit. Most of the water from the mountains surrounding my valley and flows into the resivour/lake at the bottom of my road is owned by all those Idaho potatoe farmers.

__________________