... and water’s for fightin.’ So goes the old saying.
When people think of water issues in Idaho, it usually conjures up scenes of ditches and headgates, “reclaimed” desert lands, fish vs. dams, or groundwater pumpers vs. surface water irrigators. This is the southern Idaho frame of reference which has dominated the water resource debate since Idaho was a territory.
On Wednesday, it was made very clear to the Senate Resources and Environment Committee that northern Idahoans are every bit as passionate about their water. Northern Idaho, of course, is not a desert. Most water users draw their water from wells, and there is very little public sense of any shortage.
But the same Idaho laws that govern (primarily agricultural) southern Idaho water users also govern the north end of our state. That means that the “first-in-time” established right has a priority over other uses established at a later date. This “prior appropriation” concept means little when there is enough water to satisfy all claims, and when uses have not been “appropriated” or assigned a priority date. But what would happen when there are more claims than water? How would an agency or a judge settle disputes? How would water users defend their rights?
These questions have taken on greater significance in recent years due to:
• Disputes between Idaho and state of Washington over the Palouse and Rathdrum Aquifers.
• Concerns over rapid residential growth and domestic wells, some of which are undocumented and subject to no regulation. No one knows how many of these wells exist.
• Potential for claims being made Indian tribes and the federal government.
Because of all this, in 2006 the legislature established the North Idaho Adjudication project, a legal “audit” of sorts to firmly establish water rights and their priority dates. Judging by the testimony of five folks from the panhandle, the process so far has been met with crossed arms -- a classic case of “we’re from the government, and we’re here to help you.”
At least two of them, visibly seething, said they were lied to. One who identified himself as a farm bureau member said he didn’t want to set the stage for “the Indians or the Federal Government to get our water.”
A county commissioner worried about economic growth and, as a land use planner, of being put in a position of having to tell someone they can’t develop because there’s not enough water. He wondered what the county would do if it couldn’t grow anymore.
Another commissioner attempted to play on partisan fears of the Republican members of the committee. He expressed concern that if a Democrat is elected president, the administration will step in and play favorites with the blue state of Washington to harm Idaho, the reddest state. (I resisted the temptation to point out the corollary: If his logic is correct, then Idahoans should elect more Democrats who could then cut deals with Washington to save our water.)
But perhaps the most pointed indication of the grass roots feeling toward adjudication comes from a constituent’s phone message read to the committee by Sen. Shawn Keough. “They will be facing a gun if they come to take our water rights,” it said.
The bills before the committee, brought by northern Idaho legislators, call for changes from minor adjustments to outright repeal of the adjudication process. Since hearings have just begun, I couldn’t venture a guess as to how things will go. One lesson is clear: even if it’s obvious to some that adjudication would actually help secure the people’s water rights, the people won’t be moved until they’ve had time to come to the conclusion themselves.
Maybe there really is no shortage of water in northern Idaho at this time, and no need to firm up water rights. But when that need does arise it’s quite possible that many of those involved will ask “Why didn’t you do something sooner?” Who is the “you” in that sentence? Government? The People? The more growth that occurs and the more wells that are drilled, the more expensive and complicated the process will become. Some people could lose their rights. And if it appears that delays caused even more harm, which “you” will be to blame?
Sen. David Langhorst
Idaho Legislature
Delicious
Digg
Yahoo
Circular thought.
We are you as you are we as they are we and we are all together...
Yep, walrus stuff, koo koo ketchoo.
There's a big perception that WE give YOU MONEY to DO WHAT WE ASK. There's an even bigger perception that all of YOU don't even care. Why do you think taxes cause such outrage?
It must be sad that everything seems to fall back on what John Lennon, Dr. King and a bunch of dead 17th-20th century folks say.
Idaho Statesman, 2-8-08 Mining firms want a pass on
POLLUTION! Jack Lyman, industry lobbyist, picture in the middle of the article better be careful should the constituent who left the message "they will be facing a gun if they come to take our water rights" has read the article. Doesn't matter how much water you have if it's polluted but would that logic enter into the shooter's gun sights/thoughts?
Imagine that, Monsanto Co. & J R Simplot Co. want the legislature to bar Idaho regulators from forcing them to restore mineral tainted ground water beneath their operations. Don't suppose the pollution will go anywhere besides directly beneath their operations? Water isn't like air moving about all over & mixing in with other water. All the people who don't have to do emmissions testing, even though they drive into ADA county get a free ride so why shouldn't the good old boys get a pass? Air pollution stops at the county line, don't you know!
Money talks, BSali walks, & I wouldn't be surprised if Idaho Legislators allow anything these guys want with little more than a feel good whisper from deep in the pocket of those who can afford to contribute, {buy our representation} & pay lobbyist but can't clean up after themselves, profit in hand! Who cares about Salmon? Not Larry Craig as long as he can pay his personal legal fees for his airport restroom adventures with campaign contributions & kill fish to boot.
So what is the big deal if Nez Perce want to exercise their 1855 treaty rights taking large numbers of fish? Government has taken everything imaginable from Native Americans & broke every treaty ever signed. If Craig & agri corruption are going to kill the fish anyway we might as well let the Natives harvest them. Allowing a natural outdoor recreation which brings in billions of $ to die off just so people with money who can afford a politican so as to water a desert makes more sense, doesn't it?
A recent judgment did however rule against billions being witheld from Native Americans. Wonder what went wrong with that deal? Somebody didn't make their payoff. I see government cracked down on some of the old mob families. I guess government isn't finished taking over the business. Statesman 2-8-08 National/main, page 12, Dozens arrested in raids on Gambino mob family. I'm not all about the mob but if government is taking over it isn't much of an improvement. Who's making the money on alcohol now?
Didn't I read an article a year or two ago about J R Simplot Co. getting subsidies from farm operations? I suppose I could get on www.ewg.org & have a look but why? Surely Simplot with all those billions wouldn't accept a couple hundred thousand $ of taxpayer $ after making billions in profit from the same taxpayers???
Let's quick vote in the next president so we can lose more representation through executive privilage! With Congress & the Senate neutured by Bush & Cheney they no longer have the stones to do anything explaining the low approval ratings.
There you go Senator. Whiskey for drinking, water for fighting, & representation/new mob rule for those who can afford it through campaign finance.
You do that!
Just go practice on Canada or France...
Luxembourg.
Mars.
Alpha Centauri.
We'll leave the lightyear on for ya.
I'm not really sure what you're going on about...oh well
How about a sequel to Broke Back Mountain?
Now that the Statesman has included Gov. Otter & his sidekick, Gus, or is it Woodrow? If they invite Larry Craig they can offer the movie makers a tax cut to do the sequel in Boise.
Broke Back Valley. One lonesome dove day, in what used to be the Treasure Valley, rode three stranger than most men, undaunted by reality, & screwed it all up. It was Gus & Woodrow, along with some other strange fellow in chaps. Larry Craig?
It was a republican restroom, {take away the re & an, & it's a public restroom, they were easily confused} so it was blamed on the democrats. Had they been democrats it would have gone through years of court & billions of dollars with absolutely nothing accomplished.
I'm not done yet so I didn't use the spell check. If the guy looking for Luna's bonus, the same guy who used to tell the teacher when we were smoking, would care to check the spelling for me, I'm sure Luna & his brother would be happy to give him extra credit, behind closed doors.
Down in the Valley, the Valley so low, they made a new movie, staring Larry, Curly, & Moe.
There is no spell check!
It's YOU, effendi!
Organized Society
Here we are again, talking about how to act as responsible members of organized society. And, once again, we're faced with people who believe everything they have is due to their own efforts, and nothing more, and the rest of us can just lump it.
"my water"? Who says it's your water, buddy? You and your guns? And what if more men with guns come to say otherwise? Is that the kind of society you want to live in?
Most of us don't. We'd rather be a society of laws, not of men with guns shooting it out over everything.
What GRM said.
Well stated...and true.
Sometimes it hard to tell
who is all about their guns & what they would do. Bush leaves no doubt, start a war. Some guy leaves a message stating, who ever comes after his water will be facing a gun, in Idaho where representatives use guns to get elected & an elected official points it out?
That was done for a reason, not just for water rights. David Langhorst is using this blog to get people worked up so everthing he wants to do in legislature is a hot topic. Water rights, elk, or what ever he can get attenton drawn too in order to pass legislation he proposes. No the next guy will jon in to get his legislation passed.
America could use more leadership & less manipulation. All the sudden we have college shootings all over the place & Idaho's representatives won't allow guns in college. I'm not saying they should but they are drawing attention to guns in schools. What would happen if twenty people in one class room pulled guns all at once because one guy lit a fire cracker & the girls next to him screamed? Even as a prank.
Look out, BSU. It's like the aspirin, tylenol, when you were afraid to use it because someone was tampering. Get somebody started & everybody suddenly goes nuts.
America is on edge & we could use some leadership instead of our elected officals counting campaign contributions & handing out tax cuts while individuals who pay their wages lose their homes.
I hate to think what that stirred up. I'm not promoting guns in school.
greyghost, sometimes you
greyghost, sometimes you make sense but you really missed the mark on this one. Did you read the original entry? You say Langhorst is "using this blog to get people worked up so everything he wants to do in legislature is a hot topic." I thought the article was straightforward: people are passionate about water. Seems to me that his point was that water in northern Idaho is an issue where whatever the legislature does, someone's going to be mad or feel harmed. Makes sense to me. So you missed the point; maybe because its you who wants to make everything controversial? Your post and your website looks like someone crying out for attention. I hope you find a better way to channel your energy. Maybe you should run for office?
It's a blog,
would you censor it? Decided to bounce around the blog this morning & found myself crying out for attention, just like everybody else. Good way to start the week, cluttering up the blogways.
I just happen to think government is
responsible for most of our problems through their actions or lack of. I post a lot of things just to get people thinking. What people think doesn't matter so much as the fact that they are thinking & that may get things happening. I'm not republican or democrat, it's not the party that interest me, it's the ideas, policy, or results.
It was brought up in that original post, the part I read, that someone left a message about facing a gun if they come after their water rights. I wouldn't have posted anything if I hadn't read it. What kind of question is that? Did you read the original entry? You talking down? Think highly of yourself? How do you feel about that? Like being in charge, telling someone they're wrong? Who is making it controversial now?
With recent school shootings & people trying to get concealed weapons on campus, is it any different to suggest people think about guns than it is for Senator Langhorst to bring water rights to attention? Maybe our representatives need to spend some time on the fact that people are willing to pull their guns so quickly in a state that puts guns front & center. All a politican has to do is be pro gun to get elected in Idaho. That's what they do to get elected, work the crowd on what the crowd wants. Doesn't matter if it's guns in Idaho, or oranges in Florida & politicians may not care about either, just getting elected.
I'm not against guns or promoting them on campus but like 9/11, will they talk about it for years only to have somebody shoot up BSU, before they do something?
Am I crying out for attention? I'm not in college & don't have any kids in college but I don't want to see any more college shootings.
How much attention are people crying out for with every post? If they weren't they wouldn't have posted it. People want their say, being taxpayers in America & blogs makes it possible as well as a right. Langhorst is on this blog for a reason, I don't know what his agenda is. I suggested he wants to draw attention to things he is no doubt going to make a stand on. Water rights & Elk farms. I made the point he's using the blog to do it & you think I'm off the mark? Time will tell.
It's like BSali sending out his ballot a while back. He had a reason. It was common knowledge that approval was at 14% for Congress & BDSali sent out his little ballot to get people behind him. It's manipulation.
I hope you find a better way to channel you're energy besides telling others how to channel their energy. Don't like being told? Don't tell other people. We're on a blog & you're off the mark in telling someone where to channel their energy. What do you think, did you miss the point, did I? Water rights & elk farms already are controversial. Everything government does could be considered controversial or it wouldn't be an issue. Sometimes they do it foe a reason.
Run for office? I don't think we need another politician or more government. I think we need to put the government we have back to work for US, not campaign contributors, corprorate unAmerica & Agri corruption. We have a $9 trillion debt to prove it. I bash government on my web site because of government failure which is in the paper & on the news everyday. Nextrev is there to give people a say, come up with ideas to eliminate government waste while using the tax $ saved for some things people have an interest in. The site is about people posting their ideas or supporting others. Maybe Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, education, & health care for veterans don't need attention.
It's all in the news everyday, I guess it does deserve attention or it wouldn't be. That damn attention, if I can't have it I guess I guess you will.
Would you stifle everyone you disagree with? If it worked you'd be blogging with yourself. Nobody is right about everything, being wrong isn't the worst thing to happen as long as we learn something from it & it didn't start a war.
From Langhorst's initial entry
"I plan to mix it up with some days focused on policy and some on politics, with random observations on the more day-to-day human side thrown in."
He was asked by the Idaho Statesman to contribute; he didn't offer.
Thought it was...
Snortin' whiskey and drinkin' cocaine.
Might be a geezer.
Greyghost, the point here is
Greyghost, the point here is the issue with water rights in the state of Idaho, do you happen to have any relative thoughts on that, given that is the subject, or do you prefer to continue to rant and rave about issues that are irrelevant to this particular post. It is people like you that turn others off to having intelligent conversations on blog sites such as this.
The whole site's
probably doomed, I'm certain and you must be TMZ.
Plenty of thoughts on water
rights. Is Craig going to continue to promote watering a desert & kill Salmon because agri corruption cotributes to his campaign & Salmon don't? $210,000 of campaign contributions into his personal legal fees later, I don't think so.
How about the fact that somebody was here long before the current property owners & holders of rights to water? Are we going to give all the water rights back to the Native Americans or should we go back futher yet? If I'm not mistaken Native Americans were bought off with trinkets just the American people are being bought off with in a stimulous. They didn't have title to land? When a government from another nation comes into town with more firepower & suddenly suggest language dictates who has the rights to land it's doesn't matter who thought they had rights. Money woill decide & money buys government.
Sound like Iraq.
How do you think government works? Intelligent conversation or $? $ will dictate every time. Go ask a Salmon. Idaho isn't the only state with water issues. Government has neglected water just like everything else & for some reason you think they're suddenly going to fix the problems they create. Monsanto & J R Simploat contribute & now want to mine free of environmental restrictions.
You give these guys way too much credit. I've seen government corruption first hand & yes it does play in how I think about government. Read the editorials & you'll see I'm not the only one. If you want to go along thinking government is going to solve the water rights issues through intelligent conversation go ahead. Chances are we'll have dust in our mouths before they get anything done. Put pressure on them to get it done fairly & you might see some results.
I'll set you off again by getting off water then putting water right back into it.
Todays paper. US bill rises as nuclear waste waits for disposal. Government developed nuclear weapons & several people have died, downwinders & waste over aquifers come to mind first. There is that water again & what difference will it make if it's garbage. 20 years, lawsuits, & the bill in the billions? Why would we store or build nuclear over aquifers? I have a picture from an article a couple years ago of nuclear waste, a great big nasty pool of waste right next to the Colorado River. When I saw this I was amazed at how or why anyone would store all this next to a major river. Intelligence & conversation were obviously left out.
If you're going to tell me the same people failing on nuclear waste are involved in intelligent conversation involving water rights, you're wasting your time.
Intelligent conversation is usually dictated by money in government & doesn't end with your ideas or this blog. You can pretend the people we pay to represent US are all about the issues we are concerned about & pay them to handle but in the end, as approval ratings show, it isn't happening.
I'm not turning people off to intelligent conversation, I'm turning them on to knowledge, government failure is not only breaking US, it's killing US!
Greyhost
Are you deliberately sabotaging Sen. Langhorst's blog?
No
I hope whatever he does is in the best interest of everyone he represents. I can't help it if I've never been witness to a politician doing what's right for the people who put them in office. I've written, emailed, called, & talked to politicans hundreds of times & I don't know as I ever walked away with the feeling of representation.
The water issue will go on for years & we may never see anything positive come from it. Maybe there is no true answer, no solution, someone will have to lose. My guess is the person or interest with the most money will come out the winner. It's a blog?
Sorry.
Si. Esto sin para mas reparacion?
Que?
You tell me while I watch Spanish language TV for no reason other than it's on 51 KCBB.