GMD4 - 38th Annual Meeting Slated

Can you believe it – the 38th annual meeting of the Northwest Kansas Groundwater Management District No. 4 is upon us.  The meeting is set for:
 
Wednesday, February 20, 2013; 1:30 P.M.; Hoxie Elks Lodge, Hoxie, KS. 
 
The basic agenda (business items) is the same as usual.  It is:
 
1.  Approval of the 37th annual meeting minutes;
 
2.  Adoption of the 2014 proposed operating budget;
 
3.  Presentation of the 2012 annual audit;
 
4.  Election of 4 board positions:  Sheridan County Position #8; Graham County #9; Logan County Position #10; and Gove County Position #11.
 
Since this annual meeting happens to closely coincide (in space and time) with the issuance of the SD-6 LEMA Order, a special section of the annual meeting will be dedicated to explaining, discussing and taking questions on this process.  We want everyone involved in the LEMA to fully understand it and be successful in operating within it.
 
The board will also be conducting its regular February Board meeting immediately prior to the annual meeting – beginning at 10:00 AM in the same location.  This is an open meeting as well with any members of the public invited.  This meeting will also continue after the annual meeting to install any new board members (if necessary), elect new officers and finish up any business remaining from the morning session. As always, let staff or a board member know if you have questions or concerns.

Another Hydrograph to Consider

Most of our observation wells for NW Kansas are functional irrigation wells that are measured in the Winter each year after they shut down - usually in early to mid-September.  As such, these wells are normally recovering to some degree from their irrigation season pumping levels when the annual measurements are made.  About 25 of the 280-some measured wells within GMD 4 are listed as "unused", so this group of wells may need to be looked at a little differently.

The hydrograph shown (click to enlarge) is one of these wells.  It is located in SW Sheridan County and has a water level record spanning December 1964 - December 2010.  This well was one of the original wells that was measured quarterly until 1997 and annually thereafter.  The measuring frequency doesn't affect much as you can see from the hydrograph - with the overall trends being clear, regardless. 

This well is showning a decided decline since 2000, but we see that it has been as low and even lower in both 1980 and 1990.  It appears to be showing a more regional perspective on the local water table - since it is itself not pumped annually.  Statistically the entire decade of the 1990's was several inches above normal precipitation in NW Kansas while we have been a bit droughty since 2000.  The hydrograph certainly bears this out.  It also appears that the regional climate may have been wetter from 1980 - 1985 and drier from 1986 - 1990, but I'll have to check this out to be sure.

This well is 184' deep (BLS) with the December, 2010 water level being measured at 105' BLS.  How long the remaining 79' of saturated thickness may last is anyone's guess, but this particular observation well is interesting in that it has a clear decline trend from 1964 - 1980 (11 feet of decline in 16 years), then looks fairly stable since 1980, but with several, significant, decadal-termed fluctuations.  Oh, the joys of groundwater monitoring. 

If you'd like to see the full data for this observation well, use this link:  KGS Wizard Database .  If you'd like to see any specific observation well covered in this manner, let me know.  Of course you can see every observation well in Kansas on the KGS Wizard site.  More later.

The Dilemmas of Local Groundwater Information?

Most of what I do in the arena of information dissemination is geared first and foremost to the folks of NW Kansas.  They simply need all kinds of information to make informed decisions about the groundwater resource we have been given the right to manage.  And I see the internet as an extremely effective way to provide that information - it's available all the time, can be (and in the case of our webpage, is) updated regularly and has links to virtually any water information or data anyone in NW Kansas could possibly need.  Our newsletter goes out 6 times a year to these same folks and often mentions our use of a dedicated website, a weblog and twitter for these primo informational opportunities.

Yet, I marvel at the lack of use our folks make of these sources.  Seems the older generation has the stronger desire to understand groundwater and participate in its management, but are not embracing the electronic venues provided.  The younger folks of course jump all over anything e, but don't yet have the interest in groundwater.  Heck, for all our offerings, I've picked up 2 local twitter followers (neither one of which is active today), no local blog followers and a consistently non-local visitation list to our webpage.  We're getting a fair number of hits to all these items - just not who they were created for.

I guess it's going to take a full generation for this to work any better than it is now - waiting until the current youngsters develop the level of interest in groundwater management that motivates them sufficiently.  And of course anyone is welcome to read for enjoyment or use the information we put up, but since this material is not particularly written for non-local and international folks, I often wonder if they get anything out of any of it. 

Maybe I need to get more sophisticated in the preparation and presentation of the material.  If it was absolutely relevant and snappy enough wouldn't the target readers find it?  Yes, it could all be my fault.  Comments or suggestions will be welcomed.

Governor's Water Summit

Kansas Governor Sam Brownback will convene a Water Summit with support from Ag Secretary Dale Rodman and the Kansas Water Office in Colby - Thursday, July 21, 2011. The venue will be:  Cultural Arts
Center, Colby Community College, starting at 10:00 A.M. (Registration begins at 9:30 A.M.) The public is invited, but you need to pre-register with the KS Water Office by July 15 if you intend to eat lunch (sponsored) with the group.  Call the KWO at 785-296-3185 or go to their web site (http://www.kwo.org/) to pre-register. The full agenda is also available from the website.  The session will end at 3:30 P.M.

Discussion issues are expected to include:  water conservation;  perceptions of the state’s “use it or lose it” policy;  how do water users generate more economy while reducing (conserving) water use;  and making the IGUCA statutes more effective.  After two framing talks, small discussion groups will be formed and will work until lunch.  The Round Table discussion will then ensue, followed by a Summary and Action Planning session.  This will be a good chance to tell the state (actually, the Governor of the state) what you think about groundwater issues near and dear to your heart.  This district hopes that local control is one of your concerns and that you get a chance to express this.

The results of the discussions and ideas generated will be handed off to a new, ad hoc committee just forming under the Kansas Water Authority.  They are to distill all the discussion and recommend a new roadmap for the High Plains Aquifer in Kansas - what new Legislation may be necessary; funding recommendations; etc., etc.  This could be a good thing for the fully engaged, local GMDs, or...

And the jury is still out on whether or not this summit is a true "fact-finding" and "issue-recognition" session, or, if the Governor has an agenda he is really interested in and just has to hear the public comment before beginning.  I'm not in either camp yet, but sure would like to believe the former - at least the majority of my discussions with organizers and those more closely involved seem to be convinced that way.  Regardless, I'm confident that the really good ideas will survive either approach.  We're appreciative of the Governor's interest in western Kansas water and the time and effort he has put into coming out for the day to talk about what's extremely important to us.

Here We Go With the Generalizations - Again...

I wish folks could make it more clear in their writings on the Ogallala Aquifer of specifically where they are referring to.  Take the recent (March 15, 2011) article on the Ogallala - "The Next Oil", by Johnathan R. Grammer.  He spends a good deal of effort describing the entire Ogallala (all 8 states worth), and makes a few statements about the Ogallala in the Panhandle of Texas that easily could be true of anywhere in the aquifer.  Then he starts off a new paragraph that seems to be describing the entire Ogallala again:  

"..the Ogallala does not recharge. Simply stated, while most aquifers enjoy the benefit of "recharge zones" ... the same replenishment due the Ogallala is denied it either by evaporation or is diverted by the underground and surface geology. What results is a finite water supply much like an oil and gas reservoir. Once it is depleted, it is gone forever." 

What?  While he likely may be discussing smaller, isolated areas of the Ogallala in the Texas Panhandle, this certainly can't be true for the entire Ogallala.  But he says it is.  I happen to believe the Ogallala does recharge in Kansas - albeit a tad bit on the conservative side - but that water got there somehow.

" As a result [of no recharge], the Ogallala Aquifer has been depleted by crop irrigation and domestic use at a rate equaling 1.5 feet a year in some parts. Scientists have speculated, though, such a possibility represents a worst-case scenario, that the aquifer itself may be dry beyond utility within 25 years. Others have speculated that its supply will last for at least another 100 years."

Again, no inkling of where he is speaking, but his words say this is true of the entire Ogallala Aquifer.  Our portion of the aquifer in Graham County, KS is as full or fuller than it was in 1977.  There are even larger areas of our groundwater management district that have a solid 250 year life time projected.  In Nebraska there are large areas of the Ogallala that still have 1200 feet of water and are not declining.  This statement cannot apply to the entire aquifer.

While the Ogallala Aquifer does have its "OMG" overdrafted areas, and there are eye-opening overdrafts in many other areas of the aquifer in virtually every state, you simply cannot describe the entire aquifer in such sweeping terms.  And the range of conditions that exist make average values just about as useless as well.  Our average Ogallala decline rate in GMD 4 is .5 feet per year, but we range from almost 2 feet/yr to areas that are not declining at all. 

And the consequence of this is?  I was on #agchat tonight (topic was "water") and the following conversation came up regarding the declining Ogallala:

She:  "A friend & cotton farmer on the TX High Plains had CNN out on his place today."

He:  "Do you know what the CNN story is concerning? Thanks!"

She:  "yes, its on the Ogallala aquifer. what's happening with that water table, what farmers are doing."

The press has been focused of late on Happy, TX, a place smack dab in the middle of the most serious decline area of the Southern High Plains Aquifer in Texas.  See here;  and here; and here.  No doubt the CNN crew was also interested in this region.  These articles all read like the entire Ogallala does not recharge at all; and is dropping so fast there may be only 10 years of pumping left.  Doesn't it sound like this is what the agchatter took away from her sources?

The USGS Says:  "The areas of significant water-level declines are not common to the entire region. In fact, the area of the greatest water-level declines (25 feet to more than 150 feet) is focused in...15 percent of the entire High Plains aquifer area."  (USGS Circular 1243, 2004)

Total water in storage in 2005 was about 2,925 million acre-feet, which was a decline of about 253 million acre-feet (or 9 percent) since predevelopment. (USGS Fact Sheet 2007-3029 by V.L. Mcguire)

While the Happy, Texas area has obviously taken a considerable amount of water from the aquifer in their specific area, a 9% depletion since pre-development (1950 in most cases) does not sound like the end of the world for most of the remaining aquifer area to me.  Indicative of a serious problem - Yes, but immediate disaster - No.  Future articles written I hope are situated and qualified better.  These writers all need to be aware that many non-Texas folks are reading this material too, and need more accurate and less sensational material.