|
<br />.
<br />
<br />@
<br />
<br />.
<br />
<br />Study says Nebraska
<br />
<br />J
<br />wi II'ne~d wate.r i
<br />
<br />By John Ortmann
<br />
<br />News-Times Stal/Writer
<br />A federal water study bas sbown
<br />Nebraska, not Texas, is going to have
<br />'8 greater need for water in the years
<br />to come, an Army Corps of Engineers
<br />project ,manager said ThW'Sday in
<br />David City.,
<br />Bob Roumpb of Omaba told about 40
<br />people that the Higb Plains Ogallala
<br />Aquifer Regional Study has shown
<br />that by 2020, Nebraska will need 1.8
<br />million acre feet of outside water a
<br />Yell!' t9 1l1aJotain e~ted irrig!tjQO
<br />Increases. Texas will need only 800,000
<br />acre feet, Roumpb said. He made his
<br />remarks at an informational meeting
<br />called by the Lower Platte Nortb
<br />Natural Resources District.
<br />Roumph called the finding sur.
<br />,prisin/l, ~l""'ially, considering the
<br />study was requested by a Texas
<br />
<br />congressman and wasn't .to Include
<br />Nebraska.
<br />"People keep saying those Texans
<br />are after our water," Roumph said
<br />"But this study has sbOwn Nebraska
<br />will have a mucb greater need for
<br />water by the year 2020."
<br />Me Mid . that's because Tell3s, is..
<br />expected to lose more irrigated acres
<br />than it gains in the next 40 years.
<br />Nebraska is expected to increase its
<br />irrigated cropland to as much as 14
<br />million acres, up from the more than 7
<br />million acres getting water now, the
<br />studyplannerdound. ',i ", .
<br />The Army Engineers got involved In
<br />the study when they were directed to
<br />plan ways of importing water to the
<br />region. The' Corps . studied two
<br />schemes for taking wliter from the
<br />Missouri River and two for taking it
<br />. from thE: ArkMsas River. ..
<br />A 'popular conception of that part or '
<br />
<br />:~I
<br />
<br />News TimBS
<br />York, NE.
<br />Cir. O. 6,323
<br />
<br />CT 2 - 1981
<br />
<br />the study bas been that a plan was
<br />being drawn up to takewatei-lrom the"
<br />Missouri River all the way, to Texas,
<br />but none of the Corps plans would do:
<br />that. The Arkansas River plans would
<br />supply the Texas' Panhandle'. area, .
<br />while tbe Missouri withdrawls would.
<br />supply mainlyNebraska andJ(ansllll;
<br />Roump.I, said the plans are highly ,
<br />speculative and nobody knows If or
<br />when a serious look will be taken at.'
<br />. them. The entire Ogallala study is
<br />supposed to be delivered to Congress
<br />in about a year.
<br />The ,Missouri River importation'
<br />plan that would supply Nebraska.
<br />would cost about $10 billion in 1917
<br />dollars, Roumph told the group. lis
<br />main features would be a buge
<br />pumping plant on South Dakota's Fl,
<br />Randall Dam and a canal right"'f-way
<br />about as wide as an interstalebig\1..
<br />way ROW winding across central and
<br />"
<br />
<br />,
<br />I
<br />I
<br />j
<br />iI
<br />"
<br />f
<br />.1:
<br />
<br />
<br />H~'_"~']_
<br />
<br />~
<br />
<br />. . . -. .
<br />soothwesternNebraska. '~,'" ,
<br />. The water would have to be raised
<br />, from 1,350 feet at the'reservoii to 3,800
<br />I feet at tbe other end in northeastern
<br />Colorado, be said. There would be 11
<br />siphons to take wa ter under major
<br />',river systems and eigbt reservoirs
<br />,along the way for storage.
<br />! 'Water would be dFopped orf along
<br />ithe way at water-short areas of the
<br />, state, be said. For example, about
<br />. 590,000 acre feet a year could be
<br />delivered to tbe Blue River Basin.
<br />However, this is only about one-third
<br />as much. as is pwnped out of the
<br />grOlmd in the Upper Big Blue !\.'RD
<br />alor.e, NRD records show. ,
<br />There are one or two catches in the
<br />plan, Roumph said. The first is that it
<br />wOllld cost farmers $350 per acre fool
<br />of water delivered to them; $200 for
<br />. repayment, $100 Cor energy costs and
<br />the rest for local distribution systems.
<br />
<br />He said farmers can affored to pay I
<br />only $60 to $100 for water costs now. ,
<br />Another catch is what such a Plan,
<br />would do to the Missouri River. ~e
<br />canal would carry 8,000 to 9,000 cubiC :
<br />, feet per second away from the river. i i
<br />This is 25 to 30 percent of the amoWlt I
<br />passing by Omaba and probably. ,
<br />would spell the end of Missouri River, I
<br />navigation, he said. , ..
<br />Roumph said the plan was produced
<br />just to see if such a scheme is possible
<br />and what it would cost.
<br />"It would be bard to imagine taking ,
<br />a more detailed look at that idea, "
<br />when increasing conservation would '
<br />be much more appealing, because or
<br />the cost, U he said
<br />Increasing conservation by either
<br />voluntary or government-mandated
<br />means were otber alternate walel'-
<br />saving schemes looked at 'in the
<br />Ogallala study. ..--
<br />
|