Irrigation Leader July/August 2012

Volume 3 Issue 7

July/August 2012

Jim Broderick: 50 Years of Ensuring Water Delivery in Southeast Colorado

How Has the Water Business

Changed?

By Kris Polly

H

“

ow has the water business changed in the last 30 years?” That was one of the questions I asked Jim Broderick, executive director for the Southeastern Colorado Water Conservancy District, in the featured interview of this issue. Jim’s answer was, “drastically,” and he is right. The water business has changed drastically in the last 30 years. Go back 50 or 75 years, or to when the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation was signed into existence by President Theodore Roosevelt on June 17, 1902, and the water business is nearly unrecognizable. When the first five Reclamation projects were begun—Sweetwater (North Platte) located in Nebraska and Wyoming, Milk River in Montana, Truckee (Newlands) in Nevada, Gunnison (Uncompahgre) in Colorado, and the Salt River Project in Arizona—the mission was clear. It was about building dams and canals to provide water for irrigation. The interest, support, and funding in Congress was there. The projects were intended to help settle the west and grow the local economies. That happened. It worked.

Over the course of its history, Reclamation has built nearly 600 dams and reservoirs to provide irrigation water to 10 million acres of farmland that produce 60 percent of the nation's vegetables and 25 percent of its fruits and nuts. Reclamation is also the second-largest producer of hydroelectric power in the western United States.

Reclamation’s 58 power plants annually provide more than 40 billion kilowatt hours, generating nearly a billion dollars in power revenues and producing enough electricity to serve 3.5 million homes. The Reclamation program has been very successful.

At the end of the interview, Jim mentions that 50 years ago, President John Kennedy came to Colorado to speak at the official authorization ceremony for the Fryingpan-Arkansas Project. Contrast that ceremony that took place in 1962 with the 75th anniversary of Hoover Dam held in September 2010. While the Hoover Dam ceremony was very well done and attended by

2

high-ranking administration officials, there was not a presidential appearance, nor did any members of Congress attend. Although other groundbreaking or irrigation and hydropower project ceremonies in recent years have had members of Congress in attendance. My point is irrigation and hydropower production projects are viewed differently now than they once were.

This issue of Irrigation Leader discusses some of the challenges that exist in securing irrigation water supplies and developing hydropower. John Kingsbury describes his organization's successful efforts to educate elected officials. Dan Keppen of the Family Farm Alliance details his group’s efforts to move legislation to allow the development of low-head hydropower within irrigation districts. Bob Szabo and Chuck Sensiba talk about using existing law to streamline the hydropower exemption process for irrigation districts and to protect their projects.

Nate Jenkins talks about using moisture probes in Nebraska. Underscoring the high value of irrigation, we profile the date growing industry in the Yuma, Arizona, area. We also learn of a new way to measure water flow from Rubicon and about exciting technology from CropMetrics that increases crop yields while using less water.

When asked what advice he would offer new irrigation district managers, Jim replied, “learn to be partners.” That is a theme I have heard from many irrigation district managers and others in the water business. Educating and then partnering with others is very time consuming and difficult. Are today's irrigation leaders up to the task?

Absolutely.

Kris Polly is editor-in-chief of Irrigation Leader magazine and president of Water Strategies, LLC, a government relations firm he began in February 2009 for the purpose of representing and guiding water, power, and agricultural entities in their dealings with Congress, the Bureau of Reclamation, and other federal government agencies. He may be contacted at Kris.Polly@waterstrategies.com.

Irrigation Leader

C O N T E N T S

JULY/AUGUST 2012

2 How Has the Water Business Changed?

Volume 3

Issue 7

Irrigation Leader is published 10 times a year with combined issues for November/December and July/August by: Water Strategies, LLC P.O. Box 100576 Arlington, VA 22210 Staff: Kris Polly, Editor-in-Chief Leila Kahn, Senior Writer Robin Pursley, Graphic Designer Capital Copyediting, LLC, Copy editor SUBMISSIONS: Irrigation Leader welcomes manuscript, photography, and art submissions.

However, the right to edit or deny publishing submissions is reserved.

Submissions are returned only upon request.

ADVERTISING: Irrigation Leader accepts one-quarter, half-page, and full-page ads.

For more information on rates and placement, please contact Kris Polly at (703) 517-3962 or Irrigation.Leader@waterstrategies.com.

CIRCULATION: Irrigation Leader is distributed to irrigation district managers and boards of directors in the 17 western states, Bureau of Reclamation officials, members of Congress and committee staff, and advertising sponsors.

For address corrections or additions, please contact our office at Irrigation.Leader@waterstrategies.com.

COVER PHOTO: Mt. Elbert Forebay, Colorado in background with inset photo of James Broderick, executive director of the Southeastern Colorado Water Conservany District. Photos provided by Southeastern Colorado Water Conservancy District.

By Kris Polly

4 50 Years of Ensuring Water Delivery in Southeast Colorado: A Conversation with James Broderick

10 California’s Mountain Counties Gaining a Voice in the State Water Policy Debate

By John Kingsbury

13 Water-saving Probes Take Hold in Nebraska Thanks to Partnership with Reclamation

By Nate Jenkins

16 Update on Family Farm Alliance Low-Head Hydropower Initiative

By Dan Keppen

Irrigated Crops:

18 Hard Work and Patience Pay Off for Yuma Valley Date Farmers

Water Law: 22 Clear and Clean: Proposals for Improving FERC Permitting of Small-scale Hydro Projects

By Bob Szabo, with Chuck Sensiba

24 Drowning in Petitions and Flooding with Litigation: Abuse of the Nation’s Most Powerful Environmental Law

By Kent Holsinger

International: 26 Using Treated Wastewater to Irrigate Fields in Tamworth, Australia

The Innovators: 30 CropMetrics Spatial Water Optimization Technology Demonstrates Higher Crop Yields 32 Rubicon’s 3D Metering Technology Provides a Cost-effective Way to Improve Metering and Control Water Flow Accuracy

38 Classified Listings Irrigation Leader

3

50 Years of Ensuring Water Delivery in Southeast Colorado

A Conversation with Jim Broderick

J

im Broderick, executive director of the Southeastern Colorado Water Conservancy district, has logged over 30 years in the water business—10 of which have been spent directing water delivery to district residents. The district spans parts of nine counties in southeastern Colorado, providing water for municipal and industrial use, generating hydropower, and delivering water to 265,000 acres of irrigated land. This year, the district is celebrating its 50th anniversary. The water distributed throughout southeast Colorado by the district has spurred tremendous growth and agricultural productivity, positively affecting the region and the state. Kris Polly, Irrigation Leader’s editor-in-chief, interviewed Broderick to discuss the district, its past, and its future.

Kris Polly: Please describe your district for the readers.

Jim Broderick: The district covers parts of nine Colorado counties from the upper reaches of the Arkansas River to near the Kansas border—it extends along the Arkansas River from Buena Vista to Lamar, and along Fountain Creek from Colorado Springs to Pueblo. The basin covers a quarter of the state. The district provides supplemental water available for 265,000 acres of irrigated land. The population served by the district is over 720,000.

The Fryingpan-Arkansas Project is a multipurpose, transbasin water diversion and delivery project that supplies southeastern Colorado with imported supplemental water supply for irrigation, municipal, and industrial uses; hydroelectric power generation; and recreational opportunities. The project also provides flood control for the area, helps to sustain fish and wildlife, and is used for rafting and boating.

Kris Polly: How much water does the district deliver?

Jim Broderick: Well, that depends on the year. On average, it is 57,400, acre-feet of water per year (AFY).

We delivered our least amount of water this year, just over 13,000 AFY, due to the drought. The most we’ve delivered was in 1998 and 1999, at over 100,000 AFY. Kris Polly: That’s a significant amount.

Jim Broderick: Yes and no. When we have too much water it’s alot, but when we have too little water, it’s not enough. The district provides supplemental water to the existing native water rights to help stretch the supplies.

Kris Polly: How is the water delivered?

Jim Broderick: The water is imported from the Fryingpan River and other tributaries of the Roaring Fork River on the West Slope of the Rocky Mountains to the Arkansas River Basin on the East Slope. The water runs through the Boustead Tunnel, which conveys the water under the Continental Divide to Turquoise Reservoir. The Mt. Elbert Conduit conveys water from Turquoise Reservoir to a forebay, where it is stored and used to generate power at the Mt. Elbert Pumped-Storage hydropower facility. The facility has two pump-generator units, each with 100-megawatt capacity. From Mt. Elbert, the water flows into Twin Lakes. It is then released into the Arkansas River for delivery to water users upstream of Pueblo Dam and Reservoir and downstream, or for storage in the reservoir. The system is all gravity, except for the hydro facility, which pumps water uphill back to the forebay (when demands are lowest) for storage and to generate power again. We wear the water out until it moves on. The project also stores Arkansas River Basin water (native flow) that is primarily available during wet years, and other non-

Twin Lakes Dam and Reservoir is surrounded by spectacular Rocky Mountain scenery. These glacial lakes were enlarged to a capacity of 141,000 acre-feet to meet the water needs of residents on Colorado's Front Range.

4

Irrigation Leader

help meet existing and future municipal and industrial water demands of AVC water providers. The physical features include constructing over 200 miles of buried pipeline, a water treatment facility, and other related facilities. It will impact 40 towns and rural domestic water supply systems within the district boundaries.

The second project, known as the Pueblo Dam North-South Outlet Works Interconnect Conveyance Contract, is intended to connect and move water between the existing South Outlet works and the North Outlet works at Pueblo Reservoir. The interconnect is a short section of pipeline to The last of five reservoirs on the Fryingpan-Arkansas Project, Pueblo be constructed as part of the AVC between Reservoir and Dam is an essential water storage and flood control the two outlet works. The interconnect facility. The state park surrounding the reservoir is one of the most operations would require a long-term (40visited in Colorado. year) contract between Reclamation and the project supplies through storage contracts with water users. water providers.

The third project, known as the Master Contract, is Kris Polly: What are some of the major projects going intended to allow use of extra storage space in Pueblo on in the district?

Reservoir when this space is not filled with Project water.

Jim Broderick: Right now, the district is exploring Storage of non-project water in Pueblo Reservoir would be the possibility of constructing a hydroelectric facility on subject to the existing contract rules between Reclamation the Pueblo Dam. The purpose of the preliminary permit and the district and would require a long-term (40-years) issued in December 2011, is to formally recognize the Master Contract to supply reliable water yield to water permittee’s priority for a lease of power privilege (LOPP) providers to help meet projected demands. while the permittee conducts investigations, and secures The last project, the fourth, is the Enlargement of data necessary to determine the feasibility of the proposed Pueblo Reservoir, which will increase the reservoir to project. The proposed 5.8 megawatt facility would be 75,000 acre-feet to meet future demands. The genesis of the located on the Pueblo Dam River Outlet, approximately enlargement project requires a federal-level feasibility study, 500 feet downstream of the dam. congressional authorization, negotiations with the Bureau of Kris Polly: What is the status of the application?

Reclamation, and a final NEPA (National Environmental Policy Act) analysis. The district and its partners have been Jim Broderick: The application is with the Bureau of pursuing federal legislation authorizing feasibility studies.

Reclamation. We are partnering with Colorado Springs Following the preparation of a congressionally authorized Utilities and the Board of Water Works of Pueblo. The feasibility report, construction must be separately authorized capital costs will run upwards of $18 to 20 million. We have

by Congress. also had preliminary discussions with the Western Area Power Administration, which has first right of refusal under Kris Polly: Though 40 years used to be the norm, I the [Reclamation’s] lease of power privilege process. We haven’t heard of a contract like that recently. hope to utilize the power at that site. I’m very pleased by Jim Broderick: Not a lot of places can do these types the process. of contracts. The Master Contract would be up to 40 years, issued for the storage of non-project water in Pueblo Kris Polly: What are some of the other projects the Reservoir to be used within district boundaries. We are district has underway? going through the NEPA process for the Master Excess Jim Broderick: We have four other major ongoing Capacity Contracts right now. We hope to have this phase infrastructure projects that are designed to ensure adequate of the project completed by August 2013, with a record of water supplies available to municipal population centers decision, and move forward with negotiations on the Master while avoiding the need to purchase and convert existing Excess Capacity Contract. agricultural rights for municipal use, resulting in the drying Kris Polly: That’s significant. up of productive irrigated farmland.

The first project, known as the Arkansas Valley Conduit Jim Broderick: Yes, we have a lot going on.

(AVC) is intended to be a water supply pipeline that would Kris Polly: Regarding hydro—you’re a member of the Irrigation Leader

5

Low Head Hydro Working Group—what are your thoughts on hydro development?

Jim Broderick: The important thing is to make sure the hydro development process is successful. There are too many places in western United States that can generate power, but don’t have the resources to go through the regulatory process. It is too expensive, too timeconsuming, and too difficult. I fully support any process that eases those burdens. I think the Bureau of Reclamation is doing well. But even in our Pueblo hydro project, The Ruedi Reservoir is situated on the Fryingpan River on the West getting the necessary funds could have Slope of the Continental Divide, north of Aspen, Colorado. Completed in been a problem if we had not anticipated 1968, the reservoir stores approximately 102,000 acre-feet of water to this project and laid the necessary ground compensate for diversions to the East Slope. work. The state of Colorado has helped and time consuming. The major change is and will be us by making funds available at a reasonable rate. The need combining water supplies, infrastructure and financial for states to do this type of financing will be an important resources. Our project is multipurpose; uniting irrigation, component of any future project. municipal, industrial, flood control, hydropower, recreational, Opening applications up to third-party hydro and environmental interests is a must. But how do you pull development companies for projects along waterways them all together? It is a tough nut to crack, but it is the owned by irrigation districts is a concern. We don’t know future and will require advance planning, collaboration, and whether those companies will eventually disappear. I flat communication. out believe in the first right of refusal for districts that want to develop hydro power. In our case, anybody could apply.

Kris Polly: Based on your 30-plus-years of experience, Federal criteria require applicants to indicate whether they what is your message to water managers starting out in the can provide water to municipalities, to industries, and for business? agriculture. There are boxes to check. Applicants don’t get Jim Broderick: My advice is to learn how to be partners. more points for checking all the boxes; third parties only Start working as a group, because you can’t do a successful have to have one of them to be considered on an equal basis project by yourself. Then make sure you understand the with the districts. In such a case, [third party companies] financial and legal sides of the business. Water truly is the could have received permits and dollars that would have lifeblood of our district, communities, state, and nation. gone outside the district, or outside the community. On Kris Polly: That is great advice. the other hand, if a lead proponent for hydro can’t afford it Jim Broderick: There is one last thing I would like to and is part of the process, then that’s fine. But this is a real discuss.

On August 16, the district will be celebrating its problem that needs to be addressed. I think Reclamation 50th anniversary.

In 1962, President John F. Kennedy came has been receptive to these types of changes. to Pueblo to officially authorize the project. The President Kris Polly: How has the water business changed in the provided a special recognition of the project and its long last 30 years? developmental history by saying, “When (people) come to this state and see how vitally important (water) is, not just Jim Broderick: The business has changed drastically. to this state, but to the West, to the United States, then When I first came in, no one worried too much about they realize how important it is that all the people of this water. The water industry took care of itself. About five country support this project that belongs to all the people of years into my career, people started to take notice of the this country.” need to have a voice on water issues. There has been a significant change in public involvement. Now more Since this historic date in 1962, the Fryingpan-Arkansas than ever we, as water managers, have to collaborate and Project has provided our communities with 50 years of communicate more. We have to make sure everyone golden benefits. The vision of our forefathers and the participates. This creates a more complex process, but continued investment and commitment of the citizens ultimately better projects. of today assures us an important resource for our future The second major change has been in the financing of . . . a natural resource that is indeed the lifeblood of our projects. A lot of funds are required to address increasing community . . . water. project complexity. Projects are more complex, expensive, 6

Irrigation Leader

ADVERTISEMENT

ADVERTISEMENT

ADVERTISEMENT

GISDirect Mobile

Turn your Android Smartphone into a Mapping Machine.

GIS, GPS and Camera. One Device.

Your irrigation structures are your most valued assets. And it’s your job to manage and protect those assets. GISDirectTM Mobile delivers the power of Esri® GIS technology to your AndroidTM smartphone to make it easy for field staff to map, describe and photograph your irrigation structures. GISDirect Mobile helps you harness the power of GIS and GPS in the field so your entire team can make rapid and informed decisions. Powerful, easy-to-use and affordable. Now that’s innovation and that’s GISDirect.

Learn more at GISDirect.com/mobile

1-888-791-7212 | sales@geospatialsolutions.com | gisdirect.com Brought to you by Geo-Spatial Solutions. Proudly serving agricultural water managers as an Esri Partner and GIS solution provider since 1998. Copyright © 2012 Geo-Spatial Solutions. All Rights Reserved. GISDirect, GISDirect Mobile, GISDirect Platform, and GISDirect Partner Program are trademarks, registered trademarks, or service marks of Geo-Spatial Solutions in the United States. All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners.

California’s Mountain Counties Gaining a Voice in the State Water Policy Debate

By John Kingsbury

T

he Mountain Counties Water Resources Association (MCWRA) was formed in the 1950s and represents 57 water districts, agencies, cities, counties, professional consultants, and regional agricultural interests located in the foothills and mountains on the western slope of the Sierra Nevada and a portion of the Cascade Mountain Range. I have been the executive director of the association since March 2011, but have been in the California water business for 24 years. I have also farmed in the Sierra Nevada region for 25 years, raising pigs, cattle, horses, poultry, and crops.

The MCWRA mission is to draw attention to critical issues affecting its region and to be a visible activist for the value of the Sierra Nevada watershed. Primarily, our objective is to protect our area of origin and senior water rights and make sure that in resolving the California Delta situation, the state doesn’t redirect the problem to the Sierra Nevada communities.

New Focus on Outreach and Education

Since I came on board as the executive director a year ago last March, MCWRA has become a more active advocate in the California water policy debate. The board hired me because they wanted to get Mountain Counties and our valuable resources recognized. We play a critical role in the state’s water management debate, and it is absolutely essential that our members have a voice. As a small organization, we realize that we cannot do it alone; our strength comes in partnering with other organizations with similar interests. One of the things I’ve tried to do

during my tenure is bring stakeholders together to figure out how we can improve programs like forest management.

In the past year, MCWRA has established a legislative and governmental affairs committee, a technical advisory committee, and strengthened its important relationship with the Association of California Water Agencies. We have partnered with other northern California associations and helped create the North State Water Alliance, whose members are committed to statewide water solutions that protect the economy, environment, and quality of life in northern California. Water is at stake, and it is an essential element to the well-being of northern California communities for economic growth, clean hydropower, reliable water supply, recreation and tourism, and wildlife protection. We need to work together to make people realize that statewide solutions must take into account the resources and needs of northern California; statewide, lawmakers and stakeholders need to embrace plans to enhance and protect the Mountain Counties’ economy, environment, and quality of life.

Few Californians are aware of the extensive federal and private landholdings that exist in the Sierra Nevada watershed. In 2012, a survey was released gauging the knowledge of southern Californians about the California Delta. The survey found that 86 percent of the respondents knew almost nothing about the Delta’s water issues. Most of the water policy decisions for California are made in the southern part of the state because that’s where the population is concentrated. If 86 percent of those people know nothing about water in the delta, I strongly suspect they know even less about the Sierra Nevada watershed.

In the past year or two, we’ve made a concerted

French Lake, at an elevation of 7,500 feet, is part of a string of five lakes, including Bowman Lake, Sawmill Lake, Faucherie Lake, Meadow Lake and Fordyce Lake. Photo courtesy of Dave Carter

10

Irrigation Leader

effort to educate not just the public, but to reach out to local, state, and federal policymakers. Many of these key decisionmakers live outside our region—they come into Sacramento during the work week and then go back to wherever they came from. They don’t have a full understanding of this valuable resource: the Sierra Nevada watershed.

On May 21, the MCWRA and its members hosted a day-long familiarization tour of the Mountain Counties region for 49 federal, state, and local policymakers. The tour was part of a broad-based educational effort to enlighten these decisionmakers about the need to protect the sources of California’s water. Along the way, our guests heard about the region’s water management activities and practices. We stopped at the Nimbus Fish Hatchery in Rancho Cordova, where state Fish and Game and engineers described efforts to improve the river habitats for Chinook salmon and Steelhead trout. We stopped at Folsom Lake, which is the first responder to supply fresh water to the delta when delta water quality is impaired.

Besides providing flood control, municipal supplies, reliable hydro-power generation, and agricultural water, the lake’s cold water is essential for fish survival in the Lower American River. It is also one of the state’s most popular recreation sites. While at the lake, we highlighted the Water Forum agreement, an agreement that was 10 years in the making. The agreement provides a safe and reliable water supply for the region’ economic growth to the year 2030 and preserves the fishery, recreation, and aesthetic values of the lower American River.

After visiting the Placer County Water Agency’s American River Pump Station on the north fork of the American River, which was built to provide a reliable water supply to the residents in Placer County, the tour concluded at the scenic 1,000-foot-deep canyon separating Placer and El Dorado Counties, where our guests heard from experts on watershed restoration projects. When all was said and done, it was a wonderful day and we had a fantastic opportunity to bring the state’s decisionmakers to where we live, work, and recreate. We had a great response, and we plan to make this a recurring event.

State Legislation Threatens Northern California Water Supplies

In 2009, our members became concerned when the state passed the Sacramento-San Joaquin Bay Delta Reform Act. The act focuses, in part, on improving the delta ecosystem, a mind set that we fear could undermine our area of origin water rights and diminish our river flow. On its face, the legislation established two coequal goals. The first was to restore, protect, and enhance the delta ecosystem. The second was to ensure water reliability for the state. Unfortunately, we don’t hear much about water reliability for the northern part of the state. Absent

Irrigation Leader

Mountain Counties WATER RESOURCES ASSOCIATION • The Mountain Counties region covers 15,758 square miles or 9.9 percent of the California’s total land mass.

• The counties are the source of 40 percent of the state’s water supply.

• Less than ½ of 1 percent of the state’s population resides within the counties.

• 383 miles of wild and scenic rivers are under Federal and State Law within the counties.

• Ten major watershed areas account for 13,236 square miles.

• The counties boast 17 million acre-feet of natural runoff .

• The counties provide water for drinking, industrial uses, agriculture, hydroelectric power, flood control, protection of endangered fish and wildlife, and recreation.

• Fifteen of California’s 58 counties are represented in whole or part, extending from Lassen County in the north to Fresno County in the south.

that acknowledgement, we’re very concerned that we may end up losing water to solve the Delta crisis with no consideration for water reliability on our own farms, communities, and cities in the Mountain Counties.

Ironically, meeting the flows necessary to satisfy the first coequal goal is likely to undermine the ability to achieve the second coequal goal, especially if you look at water reliability in the northern part of the state.

For years, water planners have been eyeing northern California watersheds as a supplemental source of fresh water to support endangered wildlife and stabilize water deliveries in southern California. In perspective, water exports, alteration of the delta, the introduction of nonnative predatory species, as well as degradation of water quality, all led to the delta’s decline and are now driving the crisis there. Those of us here in the Mountain Counties fear that to improve the flows in the delta, the state will divert water that we depend on for sustaining and 11

need to take all of the state’s resources into consideration when developing site-specific solutions. If we can’t find a way to make this work, we’re going to be talking about it all over again in another 100 years. We are making every attempt to let our friends in southern California know that preserving the Sierra Nevada watershed is paramount for their survival and well-being, and that we need their help in preserving an essential water resource for the entire state.

Climate Change and Looming Water Shortages Add Urgency to the California Water Policy Debate

Horsetail Falls is a waterfall in the Sierra Nevada mountain range, to the west of Lake Tahoe in the Desolation Wilderness of El Dorado County, California. Photo courtesy of Roberta Long

stabilizing our own communities and economic survival.

We strongly oppose that. Not to put too fine a point on it, but we did not break the delta up here in the watershed.

Solving California Delta Issues Cannot Ignore the Source of the Delta’s Water Flows

Mountain Counties water rights extend back to 1927 when California was developing the State Water Project.

The state Water Code also establishes area of origin and senior water rights for the Sierra Nevada watershed.

All the talk now is about improving the delta, with no regard for where the water is coming from, and people are completely failing to connect the dots. Fixing the delta at the expense of the Sierra Nevada watershed is almost like cutting off your head to save your body. The delta is the conveyance system for a good portion of the state; more than two-thirds of California residents—about 26 million people—receive at least a portion of their water supply from the delta. But the source of the delta is the Mountain Counties. When I go to Sacramento, I hear a lot of talk about building these tunnels or improving the delta, but you have to realize that first you must take care of the Sierra Nevada watershed before you start taking care of the delta. If you don’t, you just redirect the problem up here, ultimately causing the delta to fail again. Taking a quote from a friend of mine, “If you manage for water in the watershed, everything else will fall into place.”

Water wars have been going on in California before California was California, but I am somewhat optimistic that people are now beginning to realize that we cannot continue to look at each water problem in a vacuum; we

12

I believe water management has taken on an added layer of urgency in the past few years as we are beginning to experience first-hand the results of climate change.

Two years ago, we had a look into the future. The rainfall that spring exceeded our storage capacity, and what the reservoirs couldn’t hold was wasted and washed to the sea.

As precipitation patterns change from snow to rain, the state needs to be prepared to capture this rainfall to sustain a reliable water supply, which is one of the two coequal goals I talked about earlier.

I worry that we are going to see long-term droughts the likes of which we’ve never seen in our lifetime. Our region does not have the water resources or the options in the mountains like our friends in the Bay Area or in southern California. In most areas, we lack adequate storage, and we can’t recycle water because elevations can fluctuate from 400 and 4,000 feet. It’s just not practical to expend the energy to pump water back up the hill. Tapping into ground water basins is limited because most of the Sierra is on fractured rock, and we can’t go to the sea.

It’s often said that California only reacts in a crisis and until we have a crisis, nothing really happens. I don’t think we can afford to wait for a crisis to happen before we begin to think about how to address long-term droughts or climate change–related problems that have already begun to surface. Our forefathers had a vision back in the 1960s that they needed to build a good, reliable water supply for us today, and we need to do the same thing for our future generations, climate change or not. We need our lawmakers to recognize that the entire state’s economic and environmental well-being is dependent on decisions that are being made in Sacramento.

I’ve invested my life in this region, and I need to keep on fighting until our voices are heard.

For additional information, please contact John Kingsbury at www.mountaincountieswater.com.

Irrigation Leader

Water-saving Probes Take Hold in Nebraska Thanks to Partnership with BOR

By Nate Jenkins

A

new partnership between the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation and an area water-management entity in one of the most productive irrigated regions of Nebraska will give the latest soil-moisture technology a stronger foothold in the area and help save water for future generations.

The Upper Republican Natural Resources District (NRD), which is based in the southwest corner of Nebraska and is part of the state’s unique system of locally controlled water management, was recently approved to receive a $100,000 grant from the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation WaterSMART Water and Energy Efficiency program. The Upper Republican NRD contributed another $100,000. The combined $200,000 will be used to help farmers in a three-county area that lies above the Ogallala Aquifer purchase soil-moisture probes.

Use of the high-tech probes that detect soil moisture at 10 different depths and relay the information directly to users’ home computers has the potential to negate unnecessary or even counterproductive water use by cutting water use by roughly 2 to 4 inches per acre annually.

Farmers like the technology because they can cut pumping costs and more efficiently operate under the Upper Republican NRD’s rules and regulations. The regulations currently include a 13-inch annual allocation of ground water per acre. The NRD hopes the probe program will be another tool to preserve water in the ground water–rich region.

“The preferred way to meet water resource goals in our area is to reduce water use without sacrificing crop productivity, and this program helps achieve that in a manner that is embraced by farmers,” said Jasper Fanning, general manager of the Upper Republican NRD. “With cooperation from the Bureau of Reclamation, we’re hopefully helping put them on the cutting edge of irrigation technology to help both current, and future, generations of farmers and other water users. Farmers in our area historically have been early adapters of technology and this is no different, based on response to the program.”

The NRD established a three week sign-up period for the program this spring, shortly after learning of the grant Irrigation Leader

approval, in hopes of getting probes in the ground before the current irrigation season was in full swing. Within just two weeks, nearly 40 farmers signed up for the program. If enrollees install all the probes they have indicated that they will, all $200,000 of the program funds will be utilized after the initial sign-up period.

Combined, the WaterSMART grant and NRD funds will reimburse participating farmers two-thirds of the costs of probe equipment and/or services that they purchase.

Recognizing that there is an array of soil-moisture probes now on the market, the NRD doesn’t dictate which products farmers can purchase or lease.

The grant that the NRD was selected by the Bureau of Reclamation to receive is one of 34 new WaterSMART Water and Energy Efficiency grants in 11 states. A total of 167 grant applications were submitted under the program.

The Upper Republican NRD is well positioned to assess results from use of the probes. All 3,300 irrigation wells in the three-county NRD are outfitted with flow meters pursuant to NRD rules and have been so for approximately 30 years. The meters are read annually by NRD staff. These historical pumping records will allow the NRD to compare water use on fields where probes are used to the same fields during previous years of similar precipitation when probes were not used.

Rules and regulations have been imposed by the Upper Republican NRD since the late 1970s, including what are believed to be the first ground water allocations for agricultural use in the country. The district has also had a moratorium on the drilling of new irrigation wells since 1997. The combined management efforts of the district will help ensure that water savings achieved under the probe program will be long lasting and not offset by actions such as additional irrigation development.

Nate Jenkins is the Assistant Manager for the Upper Republican Natural Resources District.

He may be contacted by phoning (308) 882-5173 or by e-mailing NateJenkins@urnrd.org.

13

ADVERTISEMENT

ADVERTISEMENT

Update on Family Farm Alliance Low-Head Hydropower Initiative

By Dan Keppen

F

or the last two years, the Family Farm Alliance has worked hard to make it easier for western irrigators to develop new low-head hydropower. The Alliance board of directors in February 2010 established a priority initiative intended to serve many of our farmers and ranchers who are interested in installing low-head hydropower facilities in existing irrigation canal systems. Under current regulations, anyone who wants to develop hydropower of less than 5 megawatts (which would apply to virtually every single potential location within irrigation canals) can get an exemption from Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) licensing requirements. However, the process required to get that exemption can be expensive and time consuming, in part to satisfy National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) compliance requirements. The alliance’s LowHead Hydropower Committee has played a key role in helping committee staff in both the House and the Senate craft hydro legislation in 2010 and in this Congress.

Renewable energy has been a high priority in Washington, DC in the past three years, and recently, hydropower has finally been getting the attention it deserves. New hydropower legislation has either been introduced or has advanced forward on Capitol Hill, and Obama administration energy leaders are talking about the role that federal regulations play in tapping this proven, clean energy source. Recent developments are summarized below.

Administration Actions In early 2010, the U.S. Interior and Energy departments and the Army Corps of Engineers agreed to create a new strategy for promoting hydropower development while reducing environmental impacts and streamlining regulations.

Under a new memorandum of understanding (MOU), the Obama administration endeavored to evaluate new hydropower technologies and their potential impact on U.S. renewable energy supplies. The MOU directs the agencies to formulate a resource assessment of current federal facilities as well as identify ways to upgrade and modernize those facilities and install hydropower technologies at new sites. FERC has also been involved in the process.

The Alliance was invited by Interior Secretary Salazar’s office to participate in the MOU signing ceremony in March 2010 in Washington. The secretary and Energy Secretary Steven Chu were in attendance. Alliance President Pat O’Toole and advisory committee member Gary Esslinger of New Mexico tag-teamed the event and talked about the alliance’s desire to streamline federal permitting requirements for installing low-head hydropower facilities in existing irrigation canal systems.

Since the time of the MOU signing, FERC moved forward with reforms to streamline the licensing process for 16

small hydroelectric projects. FERC also made available a series of web-based tools intended to assist hydro developers and help make the small hydropower project licensing process more user-friendly. The resources, which are available on the FERC web site, guide applicants through the process of selecting a hydro project site, determining whether a project is jurisdictional, selecting a FERC licensing process, etc.

Moving forward with another MOU action, the Bureau of Reclamation recently completed Hydropower Resource Assessment at Existing Reclamation Facilities, an assessment of the economic and technical potential for hydropower development at existing Reclamation-owned nonpowered dams and structures.

In a recent interview, Reclamation Commissioner Michael Connor addressed whether environmental regulations are making it more difficult for Reclamation to keep hydropower affordable and reliable. Commissioner Connor stated that he believes there are still many opportunities to develop new hydropower within the realm of environmental protections that must be adhered to, but that Reclamation facilities have not been significantly impacted.

The commissioner noted that Reclamation is looking for ways to have a “very aggressive” sustainable hydropower program, starting with existing facilities and other facilities that have not traditionally been used for hydropower. Mr. Connor noted that improvements in technology, coupled with new policy incentives, are creating a market with heightened interest in the private sector. The commissioner believes a level of consensus has been reached on Capitol Hill on the need to create opportunities for new hydropower development.

House Passes “Hydropower Regulatory Efficiency Act” The House on July 9 passed a bipartisan bill that would streamline the FERC process for permitting small hydropower and conduit projects. The House Energy and Commerce Committee on June 19 marked up H.R. 5892, the revised Hydropower Regulatory Efficiency Act of 2012, co-sponsored by Representative Cathy McMorris Rodgers (R-WA) and Representative Diana DeGette (D-CO). This bipartisan bill would facilitate the development of small hydropower and conduit projects and direct FERC to study the feasibility of a streamlined two-year permitting process.

Reps. Markey and Napolitano Introduce New House Bill On June 26, Natural Resources Democratic Ranking Member Edward J. Markey (D-MA) and Subcommittee on Water and Power Ranking Member Grace F. Napolitano (D-CA) introduced legislation intended to improve the performance of federally owned and operated hydroelectric dams across America. The Hydro 2.0 Act would authorize the Bureau of Reclamation to utilize revenues from new power Irrigation Leader

production at existing sites to upgrade the efficiency of dozens of dams and improve their environmental performance before looking to build new dams.

Reclamation is currently the largest water provider, and second-largest producer of hydropower nationally.

“The wildlife that swim and live in our rivers have evolved over millennia to become highly efficient in the water’s currents. It’s time that the same dams that create electric power from those waters evolve to become more efficient with the water, too,” said Rep. Markey.

The Hydro 2.0 Act proposes to fund these efficiency improvements through revenues from new power generation at existing facilities.

“Whether it’s our water systems or hydropower projects, efficiency improvements are the most cost effective water and power supply,” said Rep. Napolitano.

A hearing has not been scheduled to consider the Hydro 2.0 Act. House Natural Resources Committee Oversight Hearing On Wednesday, June 27 the House Natural Resources Committee conducted a full committee oversight hearing on “Mandatory Conditioning Requirements on Hydropower: How Federal Resource Agencies are Driving Up Electricity Costs and Decreasing the Original Green Energy.” The hearing focused on mandatory costs and requirements that federal agencies within the Departments of the Interior, Commerce, and Agriculture are imposing on nonfederal hydropower-producing dams when they are up for licensing or relicensing by FERC. The hearing was intended to determine potential improvements and updates to these requirements with the goal of protecting the environment and electricity consumers.

Committee Chair Doc Hastings (R–WA) noted that, in some relicensing processes, there have been “abuses.”

“The relicensing process should not be a hostage-taking opportunity for federal agencies to demand a ransom to be paid to fund their wish lists, or for federal agencies to push a covert dam removal agenda by imposing conditions so onerous that hydropower licenses are surrendered instead of renewed,” Chairman Hastings noted. “It is happening. It is reality. And it is unacceptable.”

Witnesses at the hearing expressed concern that the federal resource agencies do not justify the needs of conditions and make some hydropower facilities cost prohibitive while doing little to help the environment. Also, hearing participants discussed that the federal agencies add unrelated conditions or other costs that have very little to do with the hydropower projects.

Action in the U.S. Senate—Next Steps The Senate companion to H.R. 5892, S. 629 (sponsored

by Senator Lisa Murkowski, R–AK), has passed out of Committee to the Senate floor for debate, although it is unclear when the Senate will consider it. This bill establishes a competitive grants program and directs the Energy Department to produce and implement a plan for Irrigation Leader

the research, development, and demonstration of increased hydropower capacity. The bill provides FERC with the authority to extend preliminary permit terms to work with federal resource agencies to streamline the review process for conduit and small hydropower projects and to explore a possible two-year licensing process for hydropower development at nonpowered dams and closed-loop pumpedstorage projects. The act also calls for studies on the resource development at Reclamation facilities and in conduit projects, as well as on suitable pumped storage locations.

Meanwhile, a bill introduced by Rep. Scott Tipton (R–CO)—H.R. 2842—which earlier this year was passed by the House, has been referred to the Senate Energy and Natural Resource Committee. This legislation authorizes more hydropower development at federal canals and pipelines and eliminates unnecessary paperwork associated with NEPA, while allowing for environmental protection. These projects will not harm the environment because the generation units would be placed on already-disturbed ground within existing facilities that have already gone through federal environmental review.

In the past year, the Alliance provided input as the Tipton, Murkowski, and McMorris-Rodgers bills were being crafted, and alliance witnesses were invited to testify before congressional committees on S. 629 and H.R. 2842. The alliance in 2011 also testified on H.R. 795, the Small-Scale Hydropower Act. This bipartisan legislation, introduced

by Representatives Adrian Smith (R-NE) and Jim Costa (D-CA), removes barriers to the installation of small hydropower projects on nonfederal water systems. It makes projects that generate less than 1.5 megawatts exempt from FERC jurisdiction. This bill is intended to make small-scale hydropower investments more cost effective.

Senate Energy Committee staff are working with the authors of these bills to find ways to advance a combined package. However, sources on Capitol Hill believe the Senate will be challenged to move any of the small hydro bills in this election year. Sadly, it is possible that we will need to start over in the next Congress with these bills. However, a strong foundation has been built for that eventuality based on the attention this Congress and administration has brought to the issue.

The Family Farm Alliance will continue to work with House and Senate staffers to keep this effort alive in this Congress and the next. Either way, we will stay plugged in to this important issue.

Dan Keppen is the executive director of the Family Farm Alliance in Klamath Falls, Oregon.

For more information on the Family Farm Alliance, visit its website at www.familyfarmalliance.org.

17

Hard Work And Patience Irrigated Crops

Pay Off For Yuma Valley Date Farmers

D

ates are one of the oldest known fruits to mankind, dating back at least 4,000 years to ancient kingdoms in the Middle East and North Africa. Often called the “Cadillac” of dates, the Medjool date has historically been the most revered variety, known for its soft texture, size, and sweetness.

In 1927, when disease threatened to decimate Morocco’s Medjool date industry, 11 offshoots were shipped to the United States, and in 1944, the first cuttings were planted in Bard, California. Even now, says date-palm expert Dr. Glenn Wright, “essentially every date palm grown in the Yuma area is a direct descendent from those first few plantings.” While Imperial County has traditionally been the seat of the southwestern U.S. Medjool industry, recently, rising costs have prompted growers to seek acreage across the Colorado River in Arizona to expand their dategrowing operations.

Scorching Heat, Zero Rain—A Perfect Equation for Date Garden Success

Wright estimates the total amount of Yuma area farmland devoted to Medjool date ranches, or gardens, to be 4,000–4,500 acres, 900 of which are located in the Bard Water District. The Yuma region’s low humidity, high summer temperatures, and relative absence of summer rain make it ideal for the Medjool crop. According to Wright, “The average Yuma summer temperature fluctuates between 100 and 117 degrees—if it isn’t hot enough, the fruit won’t mature.”

18

While date farming has been tried near Phoenix and Tucson, Wright says those areas have a propensity for late summer rainfall, which cause the ripening fruit to rot or ferment on the trees before it can be harvested.

Date Farms Are Not for the Faint of Heart or Weak of Wallet

While the long-term rewards from farming dates can be sizable, establishing and maintaining a Medjool orchard requires what Wright calls, “a tremendous amount of time and money. It can take 10 years or more for a date farmer to break-even on a date palm.”

Medjools are propagated from daughter offshoots that develop at the base of the mother plant. Date palms are dioecious, meaning that there are separate male and female plants. Males produce pollen; females generate fruit. Typically, each acre is planted with 1 male tree and up to 50 female trees.

It can be 3–7 years before the daughters are ready to be carefully chiseled out of the mother palm and transplanted. These offshoots may be pampered in a nursery for another year or two before they are ready for the field. Even then, it can take another 4–5 years before they begin to bear fruit and 7–10 years to produce yields viable for commercial harvest (about 80–100 pounds). Full grown 15–20 foot date palms produce about 200 pounds each during the harvest season.

Although the ramp-up time is protracted for Medjool date palms, once the palms reach maturity, Irrigation Leader

during the nine-month growing season, always carefully cabled and secured in body harnesses aboard specially designed mechanical lifts to reach the elevated fruit clusters. Nearly all of the tasks required to bring the fruit to maturity are still done by hand, including fertilization, pollination, fruit thinning, aerating, bagging, netting, and harvesting. Harvest begins in late August and continues through October. The dates do not all ripen at the same time, so pickers are what Wright calls “up and down the trees” every 6–10 days during that cycle.

Date Palms Are a Thirsty Bunch

In Bard County, date farmers use flood irrigation to water their farms. The water comes from the Colorado River at a cost of about $63 per acre annually. In the Yuma Mesa region, many farms reside outside the irrigation district and farmers pump water to irrigate their crops.

Imperial Date Gardens, one of the largest date growers in the region, uses wells that pump 1,600–1,800 gallons of water each minute from an underground aquifer. One pump provides water for one 160-acre palm tree plot and costs about $1,500 per month. Farmers use surface drip systems to deliver 100 gallons of water each day to mature trees; younger trees require 30–60 gallons per day.

Quality of Dates Creates Global Demand they can bear fruit prolifically for 50 years or more.

According to Wright, “There are trees planted here from the 1940s that are still going strong.”

Farmers who opt not to grow and harvest their own shoots to populate their gardens can occasionally buy ground-ready shoots from other growers. But compared to young citrus trees, with an average cost $15, a juvenile date palm can garner about $150. At 50 shoots per acre, the upfront investment can reach $7,500.

Once a garden is established with mature trees, farmers can count on an annual harvest of about 10,000 pounds per acre. With current market prices averaging $1.25– $1.50 per pound, Medjool dates can yield an annual gross income of up to $15,000 per acre. Even after deducting the considerable time and expense to plant, maintain, and harvest an acre, local growers estimate the net annual income per acre to average $9,500–$12,000, far more than other Yuma Valley crops such as iceberg lettuce and cotton, which produce average annual net yields of around $63 and $30 per acre, respectively. The income potential of Medjool dates is why land values for established date farms in the area can approach $100,000 per acre.

One of most significant cost drivers of date farming is labor, which average about $7,500 per acre annually. Skilled workers perform a dozen operations by hand on each palm Irrigation Leader

While the date-growing business is burgeoning in the Yuma Valley, U.S. date production still represents less than 1 percent of the world date supply. Even though U.S. production is a fraction of that in the Middle East, U.S. dates are in demand in higher-priced markets worldwide because of their quality. “When you are charging $8–$9 a pound for dates, you’re not going to be selling them to the poor peasant in Algeria,” says Wright. “But because they are such high quality, the Yuma Medjools are in demand by wealthy customers everywhere.” In fact, a significant portion of many Yuma Valley date growers’ sales are to the Middle East, selling dates back to the region where the crop originated thousands of years ago.

Ramadan is a particularly busy time for Yuma date growers. This year, the Muslim holy month began on Friday, July 20, and runs through August 18. During Ramadan, Muslims fast from sunup to sundown, followed by an evening meal that commences with at least one date—traditionally a Medjool. For Yuma date growers, this year, as in the past few years, Ramadan precedes the Yuma Valley annual harvest. Because the fresh crop of dates will not be ready in time for the start of Ramadan, growers will rely on what remains of last year’s crop—another valuable attribute of the date crop, according to Wright. “They freeze well and a year later, taste every bit as good as a freshly harvested date.”

19

ADVERTISEMENT

ADVERTISEMENT

Diamond Plastics PVC Pipe Helping Irrigation Districts

Save Water

Gasketed PVC Pipe:

For more information on Diamond Plastics Corporation’s PVC pipe offerings, please contact a representative at 1-800-PVC-PIPE or visit our website at www.dpcpipe.com

“With four plants in the 17 western states, we are a truckload away from you.”

Dennis Bauer, Vice President of Sales and Marketing

• 2” Diameters thru 60” Diameters • Bottle Tight Joints • Easy Push Together Installation • Large Internal Diameter • Smooth High Flow Rate Interior • Practically Maintenance Free • Corrosion Free PVC = Long Life • The Sustainable Solution

Water Law

Clear and Clean:

22

Proposals for Improving FERC Permitting of Small-scale Hydro Projects

By Bob Szabo, with Chuck Sensiba

S

tate and federal policymakers are actively seeking ways to meet rising energy demands with renewable, noncarbon energy sources.

Policy initiatives have included extending favorable tax treatment to renewables, implementing renewable energy portfolio standards that are mandatory for electric utilities in some states, and streamlining the permitting process for renewable energy projects.

Earlier this month, the U.S. House of Representatives passed by a 372–0 vote landmark legislation that would implement sweeping reforms to encourage additional hydropower development by removing Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) jurisdiction over certain “conduit” facilities and requiring FERC to develop a two-year pilot program for licensing certain other classes of hydropower projects within two years.

While legislative efforts are ongoing to address the difficulties of authorizing hydropower facilities, there is a significant opportunity to encourage FERC to implement its current authority and make the approval process more efficient for certain types of hydropower facilities. Irrigation districts, water districts, and water user associations throughout the 17 western states have formed a working group, the Low-Head Hydro Working Group, to seek a quicker, cost-effective hydro approval process for certain facilities under FERC’s existing statutory authority. Gary Esslinger, General Manager of the Elephant Butte Irrigation District, is coordinating the Low-Head Hydro Working Group effort.

To date, the group has developed a specific regulatory proposal that would expedite FERC’s approval process for proposed hydropower facilities along irrigation and water supply conduits and protect the structural integrity of water delivery systems from possible development by third parties. The Low-Head Hydro Working Group is working directly with FERC to achieve these solutions. Some of the most important provisions of the Low-Head Hydro Working Group

proposal are: • Hydro facilities qualified to use this new, streamlined process must: 4 be located along existing irrigation and water supply conduits within an irrigation or water district 4 have an installed capacity of 5 megawatts or less 4 be located on lands in which the federal government does not hold fee title and in an existing man-made water conduit; and 4 utilize only the hydropower potential of the man-made conduit for power generation • Because this class of conduit facilities includes smaller facilities along existing infrastructure, where the environmental effects are expected to be minimal, the Low-Head Hydro Working Group is proposing that FERC implement a programmatic program—similar to the Nationwide Permit Program for dredging and filling activities under Section 404 of the Clean Water Act—for the approval of these facilities.

• This programmatic program would simply involve a registration process, with the developer filing a form (to be developed by FERC) with FERC and distributing copies to the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and the state fish and wildlife agency.

• The agencies may raise a site-specific, scientifically supported natural resources issue with FERC within 30 days after the filing of the form. If no such issue is raised, the proposed exemption will be deemed granted. If an agency raises an issue Irrigation Leader

and FERC deems the issue sufficient to warrant further consideration, the exemption will not be granted unless and until FERC determines that the issue either is without merit or has been resolved.

• FERC should extend this efficient process only if the applicant is, or has obtained written authorization from, the irrigation or water district, water user association, or irrigation or ditch company that either owns the conduit or has operation and maintenance authority for it.

• FERC should decline to issue any preliminary permit for any proposed hydropower facility that would utilize any manmade conduit within the boundary of a water or irrigation district unless the applicant is, or has obtained written authorization from, the irrigation or water district, water user association, or irrigation or ditch company that either owns the conduit or has operation and maintenance authority for it.

With these regulatory reforms, the Low-Head Hydro Working Group believes that much of the current unnecessary, costly, and time-consuming bureaucratic permitting process for these facilities can be eliminated, while still meeting FERC’s statutory obligations to consult with federal and state fish and wildlife agencies in the approval of this class of conduit facilities. Because there is much potential for this class of hydropower project along irrigation and water supply infrastructure, these reform efforts have the potential to spur new projects along infrastructure owned and/or operated by irrigation and drainage districts, water supply districts, and water user associations—meeting renewable energy requirements and creating a new revenue stream for these entities.

In the event the specific programmatic approval proposal is met with opposition from FERC or other regulators, the Low-Head Hydro Working Group has developed an alternative process that would move away from FERC’s current application process for conduit facilities (the so-called three-stage, or “traditional,” process) and adopt an abbreviated, already-existing process that FERC uses for other types of hydropower approvals, in an effort to shorten the process for approving this class of conduit facilities.

Irrigation Leader

The efforts of the Low-Head Hydro Working Group are still in the formative stage, although we have had an encouraging meeting with the staff of one of the FERC commissioners and have received encouragement from the commissioner himself. We invite other like-situated irrigation districts, water districts, and water user districts to join our effort. For more information about participating in the Low-Head Hydro Working Group, please contact Gary Esslinger at (575) 526-6671, or Bob Szabo or Chuck Sensiba of Van Ness Feldman by calling (202) 298-1800.

Bob Szabo is a member of Van Ness Feldman in Washington, DC, who specializes in public policy with respect to energy, the environment, natural resources and transportation.

Chuck Sensiba is a member of the firm specializing in hydropower issues.

With offices in Washington, DC, and Seattle, WA, and numerous professionals focused on hydropower regulatory, policy, and legal matters, Van Ness Feldman has the largest FERC hydropower practice in the United States. The firm represents large- and small-scale hydropower clients nationwide, including public utility districts, state governmental entities, investor-owned utilities, water districts, independent power producers, and others on licensing and the related environmental issues associated with hydroelectric power development. The firm is proud to have been involved in hydropower projects constituting more than 50 percent of all hydropower installed capacity regulated by FERC and is honored to represent five state governments on hydropower issues.

23

Water Law

Drowning in Petitions and Flooding with Litigation:

24

Abuse of the Nation’s Most Powerful Environmental Law

By Kent Holsinger

O

n June 19, 2012, the House Natural Resources Committee held a hearing on “TaxpayerFunded Litigation: Benefitting Lawyers and Harming Species, Jobs and Schools.” Foremost amongst the topics was litigation under the Endangered Species Act (ESA). The ESA has become the nation’s most abused environmental law. Since its passage in 1973, few could have envisioned the litigation-driven leviathan the ESA has become.

Over the past several years, a small cadre of environmental groups has buried the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) with listing petitions under the ESA. WildEarth Guardians (WEG) alone has petitioned to list more than 681 plant and animal species.

Listings and litigation are unlikely to go away.

According to the Western Legacy Alliance, from 2000 to 2009 the Center for Biological Diversity (CBD) filed 409 lawsuits; followed by 180 lawsuits filed by WEG and 91 filed by Western Watersheds Project, among many others. These activist groups can collect millions in taxpayer-funded attorney fees from procedural victories or even settlement agreements with the United States.

Accordingly to our research, from 1999 to 2012, CBD has been a party to a staggering 835 lawsuits.

WEG has been a party to 145 lawsuits (123 of which it initiated) from 2008 to 2011. Of the WEG cases, 95 percent have been brought against the federal government. In 2010, WEG filed more than one new lawsuit per week. Most of these have been brought against the U.S. Department of the Interior (DOI).

Most have raised claims related to the ESA. Americans for Prosperity did an excellent report on WEG titled, Monkey-Wrenching the Courts.

CBD and WEG entered into settlement agreements with DOI in May and July 2011 over petitions to list over 775 species under the ESA through a myriad of lawsuits and petitions. Currently, there are 1,1,38 species listed under the ESA. These groups collected over $125,000 in taxpayer-funded attorney fees as a result.

Despite the settlement agreements, CBD has boasted of filing new ESA petitions and lawsuits as recently as June 8 and June 11, 2012.

How can the FWS process these petitions while adhering to the “best available science” standard under the ESA? In many cases, species were listed based on

scant or contradictory evidence. As Dr. Rob Roy Ramey, II concluded: There can be a substantial disconnect between accepted scientific standards and how science is used in decisions regarding endangered species management . . . when it comes to ESA decisions, opinions, interpretations of limited anecdotal observations, and hypothetical threats are sometimes given equal or greater weight than conclusions reached through hypothesis testing.

Despite standards and guidelines, many ESA decisions do not benefit from independent peer review nor strict adherence to the requirements of the federal Data Quality Act. Because the regulatory straightjacket of the ESA creates a disincentive to landowners, listing often stands in the way of good conservation work. Even the FWS expressed that it “supports voluntary conservation as the most effective method to protect species and their habitats.” And the agency does “recognize that listing may affect local planning efforts, due to its effect on voluntary conservation efforts.” Listings often restrict the ability to manage for species and could even result in harm to the species.

Bureau of Land Management (BLM) and U.S. Forest Service officials have commented that the ESA creates “a complex maze of processes and procedures, which field biologists and managers must attempt to negotiate on a daily basis in order to implement onthe-ground projects.” In regard to the peregrine falcon, leading experts concluded that, “despite having the authority for implementing the ESA, and a number of their biologists contributing importantly to the recovery program, as an agency the FWS had a limited role, and its law enforcement division, which was in charge of issuing permits as well as enforcing regulation, was regularly an obstacle to recovery actions.”

A common thread in dealing with the ESA is the need to mitigate impacts for regulatory compliance.

But, incredibly, agencies like the BLM are requiring permitting and red tape even for projects that improve or enhance habitat. National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) compliance, along with the ESA, is stifling conservation work.

But there are opportunities for improvement. For example, 501(c)(3) Partners for Western Conservation (Partners) is a designed to facilitate on-the-ground Irrigation Leader

conservation work. It was established by the Colorado Cattlemen’s Association, Environmental Defense, and industry representatives.

Private landowners contribute up to 95 percent of the habitat for listed and at-risk species. With close ties to statewide agricultural organizations, environmental groups and natural resource agencies, Partners could help bridge the gap between the needs of the regulated community and the restoration, improvement, and protection of valuable wildlife habitat on public and private lands. Companies or entities that need mitigation could solicit, and choose from, proposals from landowners to do real, on-the-ground conservation work. Besides introducing competition and reduced costs, Partners could facilitate contracts between the regulated and the applicable landowner, as well as quantification and monitoring of habitat benefits.

The system could work much like wetlands banking.

Wetlands banking has become so successful that the Army Corps of Engineers now urges the regulated to look first to wetlands banks to mitigate impacts. Wildlife credits or habitat banking through entities like Partners could eventually help break the cycle of listings and litigation in favor of real, quantifiable conservation work that benefits landowners, the regulated ,and the environment. But until Congress directs the agencies to refocus away from red tape and simply say “no,� there is little incentive for such proactive habitat work.

Now is hardly the time for business as usual under the ESA. The ESA costs taxpayers, landowners, local

Family Farm

LLIANCE The Family

governments, and businesses an estimated $3 billion per year. Yet there have been virtually no successes under the ESA. Scarce resources are being wasted on litigation driven by a handful of activist groups with little or no real conservation benefits. People and wildlife would benefit from improvements to the ESA, NEPA, and other federal laws. Congress and the administration should be working to reduce frivolous litigation, streamline permitting to promote on-the-ground conservation efforts, alleviate economic burdens, and promote jobs.

More rigorous scientific standards could help ensure that scarce resources are spent on species that are truly in need of protection. Categorical exclusions under NEPA could do away with significant red tape. And agency recognition of off-site mitigation could help turn the focus away from litigation to real conservation.

Kent Holsinger is the managing partner of Holsinger Law, LLC. Kent testified at the congressional hearing on taxpayer-funded litigation. He has been recognized for his work on ESA issues by the Wall Street Journal, the Washington Times and CNN.com, among many others. He currently represents a broad array of clients in complex ESA, NEPA, water, and land-use issues.

SM

Farm Alliance is a powerful advocate for family farmers, ranchers, irrigation

districts, and allied industries in seventeen Western states. The Alliance is focused on one mission To ensure the availability of reliable, affordable irrigation water supplies to Western farmers and ranchers.

As a 501(c)(6) tax exempt organization, our support comes exclusively from those who believe our mission is important enough to contribute. We believe the cause is important enough to ask for your support - Please join us by completing the web form at http://www.familyfarmalliance.org/ProspectiveContact.cfm.

For more information contact Dan Keppen by phone at (541) 892-6244, or by e-mail at dankeppen@charter.net

International 26

Using Treated Wastewater to Irrigate Fields in Tamworth, Australia

C

oming off possibly the worst draught Australia has experienced in 1,000 years, the country’s Environment Protection Authority (EPA) (the Australian equivalent to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency) is placing greater emphasis on using its scarce water resources more efficiently. In the city of Tamworth, located about 240 miles northwest of Sydney, this includes using treated wastewater to irrigate crops.

Craig Chandler and Bob Johnson, directors of TEAM Irrigation, are the owners of the Lindsay dealership in Dubbo, Australia, and have been in on the ground floor since the project was first conceived.

“We were proud to be involved in the project from when it was still just a blank sheet of paper.” The water treatment plant took about one year to construct and allows for a maximum daily effluent discharge of 14.2 million gallons of water, or 2,400 gallons of water per minute. When pumped through 13 pivots, it is sufficient to apply .36 inches of water over a 24-hour period to area fields.

While the project is not the first of its kind in Australia, it is the largest undertaking that Chandler is aware of in Australia and the first to feature all three Lindsay products. The water treatment project is a fully integrated Lindsay Watertronics pump station that is used to move the effluent from holding ponds through Lindsay Zimmatic pivots and ultimately onto nearly 1,600 acres of grain and alfalfa crops. The five 215 horsepower pumps and 13 poly-lined pivots are integrated with Lindsay’s FieldNET wireless management network, which allows for complete monitoring and control of the project, says Chandler.

“FieldNET is critical as far as monitoring and controlling all of the system components. With an effluent project like this, there is no room for accidents.

A broken pipe would spell disaster if it was allowed to

go unchecked.”

Before the installation at Tamworth, the entire Watertronics pumping station was engineered, assembled, and live tested at full flow and pressure at the Lindsay Watertronics factory in Wisconsin. The pumps and pivots, which range in length from 778 feet to 1,772 feet, were all made in the United States and then shipped to Australia. Chandler says they were shipped by rail to Los Angeles or Houston, loaded onto container ships and sent to Australia. “We used 6–7 containers for the pivots and another 2 for the pumps. The whole process took 4–5 weeks sailing time to Australia.”

The project took two years to complete once the Tamworth City Council decided to move forward on it, but the council took 14 years to reach that decision.

With the city’s population expected to grow to 50,000 by 2020, the city council decided to decommission and relocate two existing wastewater treatment plants to the outskirts of town. The new treatment plant, rather than dumping wastewater into the nearby Peel River, is using the treated water to irrigate fields.

During the 14 years it took to make the decision to rebuild the treatment plants, public opposition played a significant role in dragging out the process.

“It looked, at one stage, that the whole project might fail,” said Chandler. “Downstream farmers had been extracting treated effluent from the former plants Irrigation Leader

for their fields. This was no longer allowed by EPA.” Chandler also says that when the the EPA gets involved, it extends the planning process exponentially. Now that the plant has been built and operating for a full year, all of the opposition has just seemed to go away. “Everyone is reasonably happy now.”

Other than the delays in getting the project off the ground, the only drama Chandler described once construction started were delays from the power authority.

Once the treatment plant was constructed, there was a 4–5 month delay before they got power, says Chandler. “We had to move from the site and wait for the power to come on before we could go back and commission the plant. The only real drama we experienced was moving to and from site.”

Although Australia is through the worst of the drought, the government has been pushing harder for more efficient irrigation systems like lining channels, pressurizing systems, and more accurately measuring water use. There has also been a strong push for more pivots. And Chandler sees a new trend in irrigating with wastewater, both in Australia and the United States. “The days of effluent discharge into river systems are pretty much over.”

Irrigation Leader

27

ADVERTISEMENT

ADVERTISEMENT

The Innovators 30

CropMetrics Spatial Water Optimization Technology Demonstrates Higher Crop Yields

D

evelopment of the center pivot irrigation system was driven in large part by growers’ desire to distribute water uniformly across their fields. But armed with more information about soil density, topography, and crop yields, some farmers are abandoning the uniformity approach and instead are embracing technology that enables them to more precisely meet site-specific water needs. Farmers have been experimenting for years with varying fertilizer, seed, fungicide, and herbicide application rates to meet variable needs within their fields, a movement called “precision farming.” Kevin Abts, sales and marketing lead for CropMetrics in North Bend, Nebraska, says it only makes sense for farmers to irrigate according to these same principles.

CropMetrics first conducts a high-resolution soil and topography survey of the center pivot–irrigated field.

After processing the data and analyzing the information, the company utilizes specialized agronomic software to generate multiple variable rate irrigation (VRI) “prescriptions” that automatically match the irrigation application depths to the site-specific water needs of both the seed and soil. These VRI prescriptions are capable of dividing the field into 2-degree slices, creating up to 180 pie-shaped sectors within which the pivot can be sped up or slowed down, depending upon each sector’s specific water needs. Sandy or porous soils that drain more quickly may need more water to prevent underirrigation, while heavier soils that retain moisture longer may need less water to prevent overirrigation.

Abts describes this VRI Speed Control technology as “very simple, very reliable, and often requires no additional control equipment.” And he adds, “It will work with any crop and nearly every center pivot operating in the market today.”

The company has developed an even more refined VRI prescription capable of further controlling the amount of water delivered within these 180 sectors.

VRI Zone Control enables control of individual sprinklers or banks of sprinklers along the length of the pivot span. This technology allows a farmer to effectively create as many as 5,400 distinct irrigation zones within a given field. Each zone can be precisely managed using CropMetrics agronomic software, allowing every individual zone to be instantaneously adjusted throughout the growing season an unlimited number of times.

Irrigation Leader

Alternating VRI Speed Control with flat rate irrigation every 30 degrees During the 2011 growing season, CropMetrics conducted field trials to gauge the success of its VRI prescription technology. According to Abts, “We looked at the yield response of different hybrids in the same field under the same environmental conditions to see if the use of our spatial water optimization technology could help growers more effectively manage irrigation across a large area to increase overall crop production.” The VRI variety trial was set up by planting six different varieties of corn hybrids in parallel strips replicated on two sides of a single center-pivot field. The field was then divided into 12 alternating 30-degree wedges for irrigation management.

VRI Speed Control prescriptions were generated using high-resolution GIS data in combination with the CropMetrics agronomic software to automatically match water application depths to the soil water-holding capacities and topography of every other 30-degree irrigation sector. These sectors alternated with same-sized 30-degree sectors that applied a consistent flat-rate legacy irrigation application depth based on the same irrigation schedule used by the VRI prescription. Other than the irrigation application depths, each sector utilized the same center pivot in the same field with the same varieties of corn hybrids receiving the same amounts of rainfall and managed under the same irrigation schedule. And at harvest, all yield data were collected with the same yield monitor. The team chose the alternating sector approach Irrigation Leader

rather than dividing the field into two halves to avoid any skewing that might have resulted from one-half of the field historically producing a better yield than the other. Or as Abts stated, “The more we could rule out other factors as causes for yield variation, the more confidence we would have that any yield differences could be directly attributed to the precise implementation of advanced data, software, agronomy, and irrigation control.”

Abts describes the results of the trial as “very close to what the data analysis predicted based on the overall improved percent field variability when applying VRI.” On average, the same corn hybrids managed with CropMetrics VRI Speed Control produced almost 12 bushels more than those managed with flat-rate legacy irrigation. Abts says that one of the most powerful elements of the CropMetrics agronomic software is the ability to carve out an area of any size in any location in the field to analyze the yield data, enabling a grower to compare the same hybrid in both VRI and non-VRI areas.

According to data published on the CropMetrics website, VRI irrigated sectors have yielded as much as 25 bushels of corn more than the same hybrid planted in the flat-rate legacy-irrigated sectors.

In this trial, the goal was not to conserve water but to improve overall yields using the same amount of water or irrigation schedule. Abts calls this new precision farming approach “spatial water optimization.” He adds, “In our opinion, we’ve allocated our water far more effectively because we have significantly increased crop production on those acres using the same total amount of water just optimized site specifically.”

But Abts explains that it is possible to also conserve water while maintaining the same historical yield output.

“Or for the same amount of water, we can help provide an overall increased output. You could easily mix and match depending on the accessibility of irrigation water and amounts of in-season precipitation.”

Abts believes that this and other similar field trials produced two important results. First, he says the trials allow them to compare different hybrid varieties using VRI and non-VRI irrigation methods to determine which hybrids perform best in a particular field under varying irrigation scenarios. Second, he adds that the trials also demonstrate that regardless of hybrid variety, spatially optimizing water using GIS data and CropMetrics agronomic software where variability is present provides a better overall yield while using the same amount of water.

The company’s goal is simply to “match hybrids to soil to water for optimal performance.” He concludes, “And this is ultimately how we are going to best utilize our most valuable resource in crop production.”

31

The Innovators 32

Rubicon’s 3D Metering Technology Provides a Cost-Effective Way to Improve Metering and Control Water Flow Accuracy

R

ubicon Water delivers advanced technology that optimizes gravity-fed irrigation. Founded in 1995, Rubicon has more than 10,000 gates installed in integrated water management systems in 10 countries, including the United States, Australia, and China. SlipMeters™ with Sonaray® technology are currently in use in seven water districts in California, Colorado, and Arizona. Rubicon’s Product Solutions Manager Damien Pearson, based in Melbourne, Australia, recently discussed the genesis of the Sonaray® technology, the SlipMeter™, the FlumeMeter™ and the benefits they are bringing to the agriculture industry.

As the economic value of water increases globally, technology to improve water management in urban, industrial, and agriculture settings assumes paramount importance. According to Damien Pearson, Rubicon’s product solutions manager in Melbourne, Australia, farmers in Australia and the United States have been asking for years for an affordable tool to accurately measure and control water flow for irrigation applications. Affordable, low-cost metering has been enjoyed by urban and industrial users for decades, but the numerous challenges presented by irrigation metering have meant that until now, no out-of-thebox flow measurement devices have sufficiently met agricultural needs.

According to Pearson, the irrigation industry’s need for an accurate, simple, and robust bolt-in meter has now been realized with the introduction of a new metering technology developed specifically for the irrigation industry. This technology has recently been subjected to a two-year due-diligence assessment program, including laboratory and field testing, and is now being adopted as the metering solution of choice in some of the world’s largest irrigation modernization projects in Australia.

Rubicon has evolved the well-established transit time acoustic flow measurement principle into a three-dimensional a (3D) coustic measurement array Rubicon calls Sonaray®. This 3D metering technology is capable of accurately measuring and reporting water flows even under the most challenging operating conditions. Incorporated in Rubicon’s SlipMeter™ gate control units and FlumeMeterTM flow meters, this technology can accurately measure and control the amount of water released onto crops or fields based on real-time flow conditions.

SlipMeterTM installation, Oakdale Irrigation District, Oakdale, California.

Sonaray® was inspired by medical imaging technologies that reconstruct 3D images from data measured simultaneously across multiple planes.

While transit time acoustic flow measurement is not a new technology per se, its use in a factory-calibrated array for irrigation metering is a new application for the technology. According to Pearson, “Transit time is not a new or exotic technology, but we are applying it in a new way and raising it to the next level.”

Rubicon believes that this technology offers significant advantages over existing mechanical, ultrasonic, or electromagnetic flow meters.

Pearson believes that Sonaray® is the first boltin out-of-the-box flow meter designed to meet the installation requirements of the irrigation industry. He differentiates the technology from velocity sensors, which have been marketed as flow meters. Pearson explains that these velocity sensors calculate flow using the velocity-area measurement principle, but that Irrigation Leader

they require in-field calibration of area and require strict conditions to be imposed on the entry and exit geometries surrounding the velocity sensor to achieve accuracy. By contrast, the Sonaray® is a true volumetric flow meter that is calibrated for flow in the factory and can be bolted into an arbitrary installation with no requirement for in-field calibration.

Harsh and Variable Water Conditions Compromise Accuracy of Traditional Metering Devices

Unlike municipal water, water used for irrigation is not “clean” water. Primarily delivered in open irrigation canals, water headed for the fields can contain silt, weeds, trash, and other debris, which can block or substantially disturb water flow through metering devices. Mechanical flow meters, such as propeller meters, are especially prone to clogging from waterborne debris. Parshall Flumes and sharp-crested weirs require significant lengths of straight unobstructed canal upstream and downstream to ensure the accuracy of the flow-meter reading. Structural settlement, improperly placed gauges, vegetation and debris, nonuniform approach conditions, and improper flow-meter calibration are all conditions that can compromise the accuracy and reliability of measurements obtained from mechanical flow meters. For example, in 2007, Reclamation's Water Operation and Maintenance Bulletin No. 180 found that errors of up to 60 percent were occurring in flumes, and a 2009 study conducted by the Utah State University found that two-thirds of all tested mechanical devices measured outside designed specification.

Irrigators have employed velocity-area meters, such as electromagnetic and ultrasonic flow meters, as alternatives to mechanical devices because they are less subject to blockages and provide better accuracy under certain conditions. However, both types of flow meters have flaws that can cause maintenance costs to escalate and can compromise accuracy. Both electromagnetic and ultrasonic meters sample only a small part of the flow and then extrapolate that reading to the unseen portion of the flow.

As Pearson describes it, “Even with Doppler technology, you’re measuring flow using a single vertical pane, just a single column. You’re blind to the rest of the flow distribution outside of that view.” Pearson explains that this field of view assumes that the water flow is uniform, which he says is often “a faulty assumption.”

Generally, these electromagnetic and ultrasonic meters have been adopted from industrial applications designed for full pipe measurement only. To meet this requirement in the irrigation application, weirs or pits are used to ensure full pipe conditions. However these pits act as silt traps and compromise the accuracy of the meter, and also they contribute significant head loss. Sonaray® has been designed to measure accurately both when fully submerged

Irrigation Leader

and when partially full to a depth as low as 4 inches. With the Sonaray®, no pit or weir is required.

Sonaray® Provides Cost-effective Solutions to Shortfalls in Current Metering Technologies

In contrast to ultrasonic or electromagnetic meters that use a single plane to measure flow velocity, Sonaray® uses eight planes, or layers of transit time readings, to capture a full 3D view of the water’s velocity profile as it passes through the conduit. A downward shooting acoustic measures the depth of the water within the meter.

The reconstruction of the flow profile using data from multiple measurement planes is a technique known as tomographic mapping. Because Sonaray® technology uses multiple transducers to measure the entire flow through the conduit, the errors that can occur when a limited field of view is sampled and extrapolated across the full conduit are eliminated. Because Sonaray® can see the full flow profile within the meter array, no upstream or downstream straight-channel conditioning lengths need to be installed to regulate the entry/exit flows into the meter.

In addition, Sonaray® technology has no moving parts and has a clean internal profile, which means that it is largely unaffected by algae or weeds.

FlumeMeterTM (top) and SlipMeterTM (bottom) illustrating multiple transecting paths used by Sonaray® technology.

33

Sonaray® Technology Retains Its Accuracy Even in Severe Flow Disturbance Conditions

Independent testing of Sonaray® in Australia and in the United States has demonstrated a very high level of accuracy, generally better than +/-1 percent, even under severe flow disturbances such as flow meter obstructions and high levels of deposited silt. The recent severe drought in Australia greatly increased the economic value of water, and as a result, Pearson says, “[In Australia], irrigation water now has to be measured to effectively the same accuracy as urban town water or industrial water.” As water becomes a more valuable commodity across the globe, Pearson sees a growing trend toward governments requiring greater accuracy in measuring and controlling irrigation water.

Recent California legislation requires a meter at every turnout in irrigation districts larger than 25,000 acres, accuracy requirements range from +/-6 percentage to +/-12 percentage. Recent field testing of Rubicon’s SlipMeter™ and Sonaray® technology by U.S. engineering firm Provost & Pritchard in California’s Oakdale Irrigation District demonstrated an accuracy of better than +/-2.5 percentage, even when the meter was severely obstructed or operating in low-flow conditions below 1 cubic feet per second.

Built-in Redundancy Eliminates Costly Responses to False Alarms

One of the most significant benefits of the Sonaray® technology is the level of built-in redundancy. Whereas most existing technologies can only provide a snapshot of conditions, requiring water managers to deploy costly response and repair personnel based on a single error reading, Sonaray® provides 32 simultaneous readings.

A single malfunction indicator can be evaluated in the context of the remaining redundant measurements to determine whether it is an anomaly or if, in fact, the meter requires immediate service. By identifying false fail indicators electronically, water districts can save the cost and time associated with racing to the field to physically inspect a turnout.

According to Pearson, even a meter that is not fully functional still provides a high degree of accuracy. He explains, “Even if as many as 8 of the 32 data transducers are not working, we can still maintain flow meter accuracy at +/- 2.5 percent. This really means that you can deploy these meters and be confident that they will continue to measure accurately for a very long time. As a manager, you can plan and implement a scheduled maintenance program as opposed to a reactive one.”

SlipMeter™ Minimizes Head Loss but Maintains Accuracy in Low-flow Conditions Another criticism of existing flow-meter technology is head loss that occurs when water passes through the metering devices. Head is the energy that drives water

34

through an irrigation system and is fundamental to efficient gravity irrigation. Head loss, which occurs as water moves through an irrigation system and also from the friction of water moving through structures such as flow meters, reduces the number of acres that can be effectively irrigated using gravity-flow irrigation. The SlipMeter™ minimizes head loss by using a large-diameter conduit to maximize flow. “In a typical farm turnout situation, we can provide a flow meter with a 3 ft. by 3 ft. cross-section to maintain low velocity so as not to induce any head loss,” according to Pearson. “In fact, the meter does not create any additional head loss over the existing turnout configuration that it’s bolted onto.” Large diameter flow meters are often inaccurate under very low flow conditions.

Not so with Sonaray®, says Pearson. “Accuracy is guaranteed typically as low as 0.5 cubic feet per second for large meters.” This accuracy is also maintained when the meter is running partially full and effectively operating as a culvert ,which typically provides smaller entry losses than a fully submerged pipe.

Common Misperception that High Performance Means High Cost

The most common criticism Pearson hears is, “Well, I don’t need all that accuracy.” Pearson believes this complaint is based on the misperception that accuracy is expensive, and if the accuracy exceeds the minimum requirements, the farmers don’t want to pay for it. On the contrary, Pearson and Rubicon believe that the characteristics of the system will reduce overall water monitoring and control cost—by minimizing infrastructure modifications; eliminating unnecessary emergency maintenance calls; and preventing malfunctions caused by weeds, algae, silt, and other environmental factors that plague most other metering devices.

According to Rubicon, the SlipMeter™ is “selfcontained, bolts onto existing canal structures, and requires no upstream or downstream approach modifications to ensure accuracy, thus reducing the overall infrastructure costs.” In contrast, other flow meters require weirs, construction of straight-length approaches, and other inflow and outflow control devices that involve considerable expense—often several times greater than the cost of the meter itself.

Pearson describes the SlipMeter™ and FlumeMeter™ with Sonaray® technology as the first true out-of-the-box velocity area flow meters for canal operations. Since the first installation in 2011, Pearson says not a single meter has required calibration in the field; a trend he believes will be sustained. “The fact that no field calibration is necessary, routine maintenance costs are reduced, and erroneous malfunction readings will be eliminated should mean that water districts will see substantial savings in their operations and maintenance budgets.”

Irrigation Leader

ADVERTISEMENT

Nebraska’s Natural Resources Districts Protecting Lives • Protecting Property • Protecting the Future

Nebraska Association of Resources Districts

ANNuAl MeetiNg September 23-25, 2012 Kearney, Nebraska Over 300 leaders from across Nebraska involved in natural resource issues will be celebrating the 40th Anniversary of Nebraska’s Natural Resources Districts (NRDs) at the annual meeting of the Nebraska Association of Resources Districts (NARD) this year. The event will be held in Kearney, Nebraska on September 23-25, 2012.

This year’s conference highlights include agency updates; presentations on proposed NRDs project to conjunctively manage groundwater and surface water in Nebraska; recognition of conservation award winners, and Foundation fundraising. Attendees will include locally elected NRD board members, NRD employees, and state and federal agencies involved in resource development and protection.

There are several opportunities for exhibitors and vendors to participate in the different events to promote their products and services. Activities include a trade show with over 30 vendors, vendor reception, event sponsorships, golf sponsorships, and underwriting auction and raffle items for the NARD Foundation. The NARD Foundation supports state-wide youth education programs related to natural resources.

For conference registration, vendor information and sponsorship opportunities, call the NARD office at 877-777-6273 or go to the NARD website www.nrdnet.org. Donations to the NARD Foundation are tax deductible.

Nebraska’s 23 natural resources districts work to protect lives, protect property and protect the future of Nebraska’s natural resources. 2012 marks the 40th Anniversary of Nebraska’s unique Natural Resources District system.

NRDs are local government entities with broad responsibilities to protect our natural resources. Major Nebraska river basins form the boundaries of the 23 NRDs, enabling districts to respond best to local conservation and resource management needs.

For more information on the NRDs, visit www.nrdnet.org.

ADVERTISEMENT

Pivot stuck again? Put your log chain away.

RAAFT TRAcks will solve your problem.

by PolyTech LLC

• Quick & easy to install • Keeps center pivots from getting stuck • Reduces or eliminates tracks and ruts • Fits tire sizes: 11.2x24, 11.2x24.5, 11.2x38, 14.9x24 • Can withstand bridges yet float with ease over acres of muddy terrain Wholesale prices available to irrigation districts, NRDs, groundwater management districts, and other distributors for large purchases.

RAAFT tracks are manufactured using a rugged polyethylene/carbon composite plastic that is 100% recyclable and floats with ease over acres of muddy terrain. RAAFT Tracks are designed to operate in field conditions from 40° F to 105° F, with water being applied to the wet the track. It can be winter moved at temperatures down to -10°. Lightweight enough to be carried/dragged by one person, 4 to 6 bolts for installation per tower, depending on the model.

For more information, please visit our web site at

www.RAAFT.com

e-mail raaftsales@gmail.com or phone (402)

261-5774

ADVERTISEMENT

Irrigation Leader

37

CLASSIFIED LISTINGS references, to the Columbia Irrigation District, Attention Board of Directors, 10 E Kennewick Avenue, Kennewick, WA 99336 For more information about this position, please contact the CID offices at (509) 586-6118.

Columbia Irrigation District DISTRICT MANAGER Kennewick, WA The Columbia Irrigation District (CID) is seeking qualified candidates to apply for the position of District Manager (DM). The DM will report to a five member Board of Directors and manage all aspects of CID operations. As the DM, you will: manage field and office staff; oversee CID infrastructure; perform long term planning; manage repair, maintenance, and new construction projects; oversee engineering service and construction contracts; maintain effective customer relations; implement regulatory or oversight agency requirements; manage district finances; develop budgets; implement safety requirements; ensure compliance with public works requirements and applicable regulations; oversee procurement activities; and verify conduct of routine facility and equipment maintenance activities.

The most qualified candidates will have considerable knowledge and experience related to management principles at the local government level; and have demonstrated experience with public budgeting, finance, and personnel management. He or she will have demonstrated the ability to effectively manage project scope, schedules, and budgets associated with complex engineering and construction projects. The candidate will have excellent communication and interpersonal skills and be capable of sustaining productive working relationships with CID Board of Directors, staff, patrons, municipalities, utilities, and other government, industry, and public stakeholders. The candidate must be capable of analyzing complex problems, and exercise sound decision making. He or she will have experience formulating policies, implementing plans and programs, and developing long-term strategic plans. The candidate should have experience with the design and operations of irrigation systems and a familiarity with applicable regulations.

A minimum of 5 years related experience in a management role is required. A bachelor's degree in a related field with supplemental engineering or public works training is strongly desired. A competitive salary and benefits package will be provided.

Qualified candidates are encouraged to submit a resume, cover letter, and 38

Deputy State Engineer, State of Wyoming Closing Date: Open until Filled Salary Range: $7,083.00–$8,850.00 per month Location: Cheyenne Work Description: Reports directly to the State Engineer and acts as delegate in areas relating to Wyoming water law, water administration, and agency representation.

Requirements and preferences: • Applicant must be registered as a Professional Engineer in the state of Wyoming or have the ability to become registered within 1 year of employment.

• Preference will be given to candidates with a bachelor's degree in civil, geologic or hydrologic engineering, geology, hydrology or water resource sciences plus 5 years of professional work experience in geologic or hydrologic analysis, irrigation management or water rights administration, including 5 years with supervisory responsibility.

To apply: • go to http://statejobs.state.wy.us/ JobSearchDetail.aspx?ID=20285, or • submit a State of Wyoming Employment Application to the Human Resource Division, Emerson Building, 2001 Capitol Avenue, Cheyenne, WY 82002-0060, Phone: (307)777-7188 Fax: (307)777-6562, along with transcripts of any relevant course work.

Rubicon Water is currently seeking an experienced, highly motivated Agricultural Engineer to join our team in Phoenix, AZ, or Imperial, CA. FarmConnect Manager Phoenix, AZ, or Imperial, CA This position is responsible for building and

managing Rubicon’s new on-farm product line (FarmConnect™), introducing and successfully implementing on-farm water management solutions to farmers in the Western United States. The successful candidate will be responsible and accountable for developing and implementing the go-to-market strategy, generating leads, conducting business development activities, writing proposals and scope of work, overseeing and coordinating installations, and developing/managing key customers or dealer accounts. Business development experience is very important.

Bachelor's degree in Agricultural Engineering required with 5 to 10 years of experience/ knowledge in surface irrigation and related hydraulics, methods, techniques, and practices required.

Visit us at www.rubiconwater.com or contact us at 877-440-6080 to learn more about Rubicon Water and current career opportunities.

Send your resumes to employment@rubiconwater.com Rubicon Water is an Equal Opportunity Employer

Rubicon Water is currently seeking an experienced, highly motivated Field Engineer/ Technician to join our team in Phoenix, AZ. Field Engineer/Technician Phoenix, AZ The position involves the installation, troubleshooting, and support of automated irrigation control systems throughout the Americas. The successful candidate will be required to complete and oversee every aspect of project installation from product installation and commissioning to integration into SCADA and HMI systems. Duties include in-field programming and support of RTU, instrumentation, solar power systems, and motor/cable drives. Strong civil and mechanical aptitude required.

This position would suit a “hands-on” technical field engineer or electrical field technician with 2+ years’ experience in the agricultural irrigation or water industry with knowledge of PLC, SCADA, and RTU systems. Associate's degree in Electrical, Mechanical, or Civil Engineering; or equivalent qualification preferred.

Visit us at www.rubiconwater.com or contact us at 877-440-6080 to learn more about Rubicon Water and current career opportunities.

Irrigation Leader

CLASSIFIED LISTINGS Send your resumes to employment@rubiconwater.com

of experience/knowledge in agricultural irrigation or water industry preferred

Rubicon Water is an Equal Opportunity Employer

Visit us at www.rubiconwater.com or contact us at 877-440-6080 to learn more about Rubicon Water and current career opportunities.

Rubicon Water is currently seeking an experienced, highly motivated Project Engineer to join our team in Fort Collins, CO.

Send your resumes to employment@rubiconwater.com Rubicon Water is an Equal Opportunity Employer

Submittals shall be sealed and clearly marked: “RFQ – FEASIBILITY STUDY FOR A REGIONAL SOUTH CENTRAL TEXAS POWER AND DESALINATION PROJECT."

Project Delivery Engineer Fort Collins, CO This flexible, hands-on role will primarily be responsible for supporting project execution throughout the Americas. The successful candidate will be responsible for product selection/sizing and review of civil installation works required for all projects. The candidate will also serve as a Project Manager, working with client’s engineers to oversee implementation of Rubicon’s hardware, software, and SCADA solutions. As needed the role will generate CAD drawings and support the field technicians in installation, commissioning, diagnostics, warehouse logistics support, product installation, and product manufacturing and assembly.

Bachelor's degree in Civil or Mechanical Engineering required with 4 to 10 years

until 2:00 pm on Wednesday, September 12, 2012. Submittal forms can be obtained by contacting Yolanda Pierce at (830) 379-5822 x 271 or ypierce@gbra.org.

Interested parties are, after reviewing the RFQ, encouraged to call James Lee Murphy, Esq. and/or Gary Asbury, P.E., at (830) 379-5822 to schedule a meeting or meetings to discuss the specific parameters of the RFQ.

The Guadalupe-Blanco River Authority reserves the right to accept or reject any and all proposals at its option, including nonconforming proposals, and to waive any formalities.

Request For Qualifications The Guadalupe-Blanco River Authority (GBRA) is seeking submittals for a Request for Qualifications (RFQ) for preparing a feasibility assessment study for developing ocean water desalination regional water supply, including the option of co-located power generation facilities.

All qualified firms including Small, Minority, and Women-Owned Businesses are encouraged to submit proposals in response to this project. Submittals may be turned in at the GBRA Seguin headquarters located at 933 East Court Street, Seguin, Texas 78155

For information on posting to the Classified Listings, please e-mail Irrigation.Leader@ waterstrategies.com.

Steven L. Hernandez attorney at law Specializing in

U.S. Bureau of Reclamation Contracts and Western Water Law 21OO North Main Street Suite 1A P.O. Box 13108 Las Cruces, NM 88013

(575) 526-2101 Fax (575) 526-2506 Email:

slh@lclaw-nm.com

2012 CALENDAR Aug. 1–3 Aug. 15–17 Sep. 23–25 Oct. 10–12 Oct. 11–12 Oct. 24–26 Oct. 30 Oct. 31–Nov. 2 Nov. 2–6 Nov. 27–30 Nov. 29–30 Dec. 4–7 Dec. 5–7 Dec. 12–14

National Water Resources Assn., Western Water Seminar, Sun Valley, ID Colorado Water Congress, Summer Conference, Steamboat Springs, CO Nebraska Assn. of Resource Districts, Annual Conference, Kearney, NE Western States Water Council, Fall Council Meetings, San Antonio, TX Oregon Water Resources Congress, Technology Seminar, Bend, OR Texas Water Conservation Assn., Fall Meeting, San Antonio, TX Columbia Basin Development League, Conf. & Annual Mtg., Moses Lake, WA National Water Resources Assn., Annual Conference, Coronado, CA Irrigation Assn., Irrigation Show and Conference, Orlando, FL Oregon Water Resources Congress, Annual Conference, Hood River, OR Idaho Water Users Assn., Winter Water Law Seminar, Boise, ID Assn. of California Water Agencies, Fall Conference, San Diego, CA Washington State Water Resources Assn., Annual Conference, Spokane, WA Colorado River Water Users Assn., Annual Conference, Las Vegas, NV

For more information on advertising in Irrigation Leader magazine, or if you would like a water event listed here, please phone (703) 517-3962 or e-mail Irrigation.Leader@waterstrategies.com.

Submissions are due the first of each month preceding the next issue.

Past issues of Irrigation Leader are archived at

www.WaterandPowerReport.com