KEARNEY -- A proposed rule that would put further regulations on thousands of groundwater irrigators across Nebraska was met with stiff opposition from the vast majority of public testimony taken Thursday by the Department of Natural Resources in Kearney.

And Don Adams, executive director of Nebraskans First, is calling on Gov. Dave Heineman to intervene.

"It is imperative now that Gov. Heineman intervene and instruct the DNR to go back to the negotiated rule-making committee and develop some new rules that are reasonable, less intrusive and not harmful to the economy and our producers," Adams said. "This matter is of such importance that the governor's intervention is desperately needed right now."

What's bugging many people is the proposal to extend the regulations to thousands of new acres of land where wells that have pumped groundwater for 50 years have contributed to a 10 percent decline in river flows.

Opposing the proposed DNR rules was the Central Platte Natural Resources District, which is based in Grand Island. In April, CPNRD board members took a stand against the proposed DNR rules when they voted to support current boundaries of a temporary suspension on new well drilling.

The CPNRD board had voted in 2003 to establish the temporary suspension in an area where wells that have pumped groundwater for 40 years have contributed to a 28 percent or more decline in river flows. That covers a six- to eight-mile area along the Platte River throughout the district.

If the state adopts the new proposed 50-year/10 percent rule, not only the entire CPNRD but also areas of adjoining NRDs would be covered by the well drilling suspension.

And it's the 50/10 rule that had most of the several hundred people attending the public hearing on Thursday upset.

"It will determine where the boundaries are for managing groundwater for the sake of surface water supplies," said Ron Bishop, CPNRD manager. "The difference between what we thought was going to be proposed and what they are currently proposing is hundreds of thousands of acres larger under their current proposal than what we anticipated originally."

In the CPNRD, the proposed rule could double or even triple the number of landowners who will be regulated for the sake of surface water supplies.

"We will have to keep track of and make sure that there's no new uses unless those new uses get a variance or permit and provide adequate offset," Bishop said.

At the hearing, Bishop strongly suggested that the Department of Natural Resources reconsider the proposed 50/10 boundary and return to the standard that has been utilized, the 40/28.

Towns and their water supplies, along with businesses, fall under the same regulations in that, if they demand a new use of water, it has to be offset somewhere.

Adams of Nebraskans First said the proposed rules being put forth by DNR are "purely arbitrary and woefully lacking in a basis in sound science."

"These rules involve overreaching because they will allow state intervention and control into areas of this state where there are no problems even remotely akin to the problems western Nebraska is experiencing, due to the prolonged drought," Adams said.

Adams and other people at the hearing were concerned about the financial harm the proposed rule would have on Nebraska's agricultural-based economy.

"In a state like ours -- where irrigation is a necessity, not a luxury -- these rules make no economic sense," Adams said. "The livelihoods of hundreds of thousands of Nebraskans who are directly or indirectly dependent on irrigated agricultural production will be impacted. These extreme rules will allow the DNR to control the means of agricultural production."

Speaking in favor of the proposed rule were a handful of people, including Don Kraus, manager of the Central Nebraska Public Power and Irrigation District.

Because of the prolonged drought, Kraus said, surface irrigators who depend on Lake McConaughy have seen their water supply cut by 63 percent. Kraus and others believe that groundwater irrigation has a direct impact on surface water supplies.

"But groundwater pumpers have no restrictions," he said.

Kraus said his group supports the 50/10 rule.

Coming under criticism was Department of Natural Resources Director Roger Patterson. Adams said Patterson will sign off on the proposed rules before leaving his position on Aug. 19 to become a private consultant.

"These rules will then carry the force of law," Adams said. "Mr. Patterson should not be makings this decision on these proposed rules that he alone developed, contrary to the wishes of a committee he convened to develop a fair set of rules for all concerned."

Adams' comments may be right, Patterson said, "but nobody has put more work into the issue working with the people and putting the rule together."

He said it wasn't a given that a decision will be made before he leaves his position next Friday.

Patterson said the rule lays out the criteria the department proposes to use when evaluating river basins in Nebraska to determine if they are fully appropriated or over appropriated when it come to groundwater use.

"We want to be proactive and stop development in basins before they are overdeveloped and develop a management plan," he said. "We did not want to see more basins in the state end up like the Republican River, where we have overdeveloped and we are out there telling people to use less water and putting a lot of regulations in place."

Patterson said prior to the public hearing Thursday that, if there's no testimony that would require a change in the rules, DNR would approve it "fairly quickly" within a week or so.

"Sometimes we have had testimony that causes us to suggest a change," he said. "If that is the case, then we would re-change the rule and republish it and would have a second hearing. That happens once in a while. It is not real frequent, but it does happen."

Patterson said there are people in the state who would like to see the proposed 50/10 even stricter.

"We have two very distinct camps -- groundwater people on one side and surface water people on the other side," he said. "Our next step is to look at all the comments we got and make a decision to either proceed with the rule as drafted or make changes to the rule, re-advertise it and have another hearing."

Click here to return to story:
http://www.theindependent.com/stories/081205/new_groundwater12.shtml

© The Grand Island Independent