Irrigation Leader July/August 2016

Volume 7 Issue 7

July/August 2016

Managing From the Ground Up: A Conversation With Mark Zirschky of the Pioneer Irrigation District

Listening Is Key

By Kris Polly

I

t has been my great honor to meet many irrigation district managers and to learn about their different management and leadership styles. Mark Zirschky, district superintendent for the Pioneer Irrigation District, is one of my favorite kinds of irrigation leaders, because he is a listener. Quiet and soft-spoken by nature, Mark is not one who talks to hear himself speak. He is an observer, and he is interested in making improvements and solving problems. I met Mark in Melbourne, Australia, as he was a participant in our Australia irrigation tour last February.

Over the course of our tour, I was able to get to know Mark and learn more about his district. Beginning as a ditch rider right out of high school and rising through the jobs to superintendent is impressive. Such experience provides a great understanding of all the necessary functions of an irrigation district and an appreciation for the unique challenges and responsibilities of its workers.

During his short, six-year tenure as superintendent, Mark has implemented several infrastructure improvements and automated efficiencies for Pioneer’s delivery system. He created a safety program that reduced the district’s insurance premiums while making a better working environment for his people. Additionally, he has upgraded the district’s communications and recordkeeping by using smartphones and a specialized app for his ditch riders.

Mark is open to anything that makes an improvement, increases safety, and saves money. That sounds like a simple thing to be about and to do. However, the reality of finding solutions and implementing changes can be difficult. One of the secrets to Mark’s success is that he listens to people and learns from their experiences. He is also quick to give others credit for their ideas. It was not Mark’s idea to have a monthly safety meeting; his good friend Greg Curtis of the Nampa and Meridian Irrigation District thought of that. Such examples may seem small or inconsequential to some people, but they are indications of a highly effective mindset in seeking solutions.

Mark’s advice is a testament of his openness to the ideas of others. “It is important to allow your employees to lead and feel like their ideas are important. We may all learn better ways of doing things by allowing our employees to be heard and think outside the box.”

Listening is key.

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 U.S. Bureau of Reclamation, and other federal government agencies.

He may be contacted at Kris.Polly@waterstrategies.com.

Are you Advertising in Irrigation Leader?

Do you have a product or service of value to the agricultural producer or water provider communities?

Are you a leader in your field? If so, we invite you to advertise in Irrigation Leader magazine.

Published 10 times a year, Irrigation Leader is a forum for water professionals and policymakers to discuss key issues and challenges of the day.

Irrigation Leader is distributed to more than 10,000 agricultural water professionals, including irrigation district managers and boards of directors in the 17 western states, Bureau of Reclamation officials, members of Congress and committee staff, and irrigation-associated businesses.

For more information, please contact Kip Polly at

(308) 350-8183 or Kip.Polly@waterstrategies.com

C O N T E N T S

JULY/AUGUST 2016

2

Listening Is Key

By Kris Polly VOLUME 7

ISSUE 7

Irrigation Leader is published 10 times a year with combined issues for July/August and November/December by Water Strategies LLC 4 E Street SE Washington, DC 20003 STAFF: Kris Polly, Editor-in-Chief John Crotty, Senior Writer Robin Pursley, Graphic Designer Capital Copyediting LLC, Copyeditor 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. For more information, please contact John Crotty at (202) 698-0690 or john.crotty@waterstrategies.com.

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.

Copyright © 2016 Water Strategies LLC. Irrigation Leader relies on the excellent contributions of a variety of natural resources professionals who provide content for the magazine. However, the views and opinions expressed by these contributors are solely those of the original contributor and do not necessarily represent or reflect the policies or positions of Irrigation Leader magazine, its editors, or Water Strategies LLC. The acceptance and use of advertisements in Irrigation Leader do not constitute a representation or warranty by Water Strategies LLC or Irrigation Leader magazine regarding the products, services, claims, or companies advertised.

COVER PHOTO: Mark Zirschky, superintendent of the Pioneer Irrigation District.

4

Managing From the Ground Up: A Conversation With Mark Zirschky of the Pioneer Irrigation District

10 Securing Water for Idaho’s Future:

Arrowrock Dam

By Senator James Risch

12

Looking Forward: Western Water Planning and Storage

By Senator Jeff Flake

16

From Arrowrock to Anderson Ranch: Creating Storage for the Future in Idaho’s Treasure Valley

By Daren Coon

18

The Idaho Groundwater Settlement: Law, Science, and Political Commitment

22

Bringing (Water) Balance to the Valley: The Westlands Drainage Settlement

By Johnny Amaral

24

Managing Western Water During Times of Climate Uncertainty

By Katharine Dahm, Avra Morgan, and David Raff

DITCH RIDER PROFILE

28

Nick Granden, Pioneer Irrigation District

WATER LAW

32

Sustaining Irrigation District Functions in an Urbanizing Landscape

By Andrew J. Waldera

INNOVATORS

36 Letting the Product Speak for Itself: Diamond Plastics Opens Up Its Manufacturing Plant to the Water Community

38 Classifieds Irrigation Leader

3

Managing From the Ground Up: A Conversation With Mark Zirschky of the Pioneer Irrigation District

S

ituated on the western end of Idaho’s Treasure Valley, the Pioneer Irrigation District has provided irrigation water to parts of Canyon and Ada Counties for more than 100 years. Pioneer delivers water to both agricultural and residential water users, including backyards and pastures. Its agricultural water users grow potatoes, corn, mint, and sugar beet.

Pioneer has rights to 61,300 acre-feet of water out of Lucky Peak, Andersen Ranch, and Arrowrock Reservoirs. Pioneer’s canals date back to the late 1800s.

The Phyllis Canal, Pioneer’s main water delivery canal, is the district’s longest at 34 miles. Along with the Phyllis, the Highline and Lowline Canals deliver to 34,000 acres.

Mark Zirschky knows the ins and outs of his district’s operations, from running ditch banks to operating heavy equipment. A native of the Nampa area, he started with Pioneer back in 1992 as a ditch rider right out of high school. Mr. Zirschky was promoted to foreman in 2004, at which point he took over all general maintenance for the district. He became district superintendent in 2010 and now oversees 12 employees engaged in district operations and maintenance.

Irrigation Leader’s editor-in-chief, Kris Polly, spoke with Mr. Zirschky about the role of drainage

and conservation in his district’s operations and finding ways to build employee safety, morale, and accountability.

Kris Polly: Tell us about your system. How much does Pioneer divert from the Boise River, and how does the district get water to its patrons?

Mark Zirschky: On average, we divert 400 cubic feet per second (cfs) from the river to the Phyllis Canal. At peak, which is generally a two-week period, the total diverted into the canal is 500 cfs.

We have a six-month season. This year, we started April 1, and we will probably run until mid-October.

On average, we will get about 350 cfs during the irrigation season.

What is unique about our system is our reliance on drainage water. While the Phyllis Canal diverts all of its water out of the Boise River, the Highline Canal diverts one-third of its water out of the Boise River and the other two-thirds comes from drainage rights—water returned through the drainage system from water used on the Phyllis Canal. We are basically picking that back up and using it on the Highline side. The Lowline Canal is 100 percent

The district’s ditch riders and fleet of rigs.

4

Irrigation Leader

Installation of a section of concrete canal liner on the Phyllis Canal. Pioneer has undertaken a multiyear project to line the Phyllis Canal in an effort to improve efficiency, lower operating levels in the canal, and retain seepage from the canal to increase its delivery totals downstream and lessen the burden on storage use.

drain water right. Again, most of the water that the Lowline picks up is water from the Phyllis Canal.

We are conservative in that way—much of the water running in the Highline and Lowline Canals is drainage water.

Kris Polly: Does Pioneer undertake any conservation projects in addition to the conservation and reuse built into the system?

Mark Zirschky: The Phyllis Canal experiences high fill more than the other two canals, and we notice more seepage because most of the canal is perched above the land. So we are lining segments of the Phyllis Canal as part of an ongoing conservation project. In fact, we try to line a couple hundred to one thousand feet of canal a year. In addition, as urbanization occurs we are seeing some of our open-ditch canals being put into pipe.

When I started as superintendent, I set out what I wanted to accomplish before I retired. One of the things on my list was to line the first 5 miles on the Phyllis Canal with concrete. That area restricts how much we can divert from the Boise River. So by lining it, we conserve water and move Irrigation Leader

it faster, allowing us to divert higher flows. Our pumps and wells are very expensive, upward of $1,500 a month each. So the more we can rely on natural flow, the more money we can save our patrons.

Kris Polly: Is automation part of your conservation efforts?

Mark Zirschky: We installed our first automated gate on the Phyllis Canal in 2004 with a WaterSMART grant from the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation. We automated a control gate to maintain both the river pool and the Phyllis pool.

Since then, we have automated a total of 10 sites, most of which are observation sites.

So now, when it is 2:00 a.m., and we start seeing the drop in the water level in the canal from the cities ramping up their use, I can get on the phone and turn a pump on. Everything we have is SCADA, so we can do that immediately.

Kris Polly: Do these conservation efforts affect your return flows?

5

Pioneer’s Boise River diversion structure, which diverts water to the Phyllis Canal. Daily flow records are obtained from this site and reported to the river master to ensure daily diversion charges from storage.

Mark Zirschky: Absolutely. We are seeing that to some degree, even as far as the operation spills that we have on the Phyllis Canal. Without automation, we had to keep up to 40 cfs in the canal on any given day to allow for evaporation and fluctuation. Now, with automation, we are able to keep that down to 10 cfs.

Kris Polly: What role does pumping play in your system?

Mark Zirschky: We can pump a total of 50 cfs, which serves as a supplement to surface water in the canal. We have 72 pumps and wells. Pioneer sits on the lowest area of the county, so there is often too much water in the aquifer.

Our drainage ditches run up to 40 feet wide and 15 feet deep. You’ll see water percolating out of the banks of those ditches. We run our wells to move the water out for flood prevention.

Kris Polly: What is the biggest challenge that your district faces?

Mark Zirschky: Honestly, reservoir storage. In my opinion, we need to enhance storage capacity. We need to catch more water running off the mountains. We are working on this issue with other irrigation districts and the Idaho Department of Water Resources.

6

Kris Polly: You run an effective safety program for your employees. How did you go about putting it together, and how does it work?

Mark Zirschky: Early on, it seemed clear to me that we could save tens of thousands of dollars by implementing safety policies. I went online and found a safety manual created by the U.S. Department of the Interior back in the 1980s. It is very old school, but it covers the basics: electrical safety, water safety, slip and fall hazards. I built my program using that as a template and updated some of the information.

I also added elements from other districts. Every month, I attend a meeting of southwestern Idaho irrigation managers (I am currently the chair). We talk about anything and everything. At one of our meetings, Greg Curtis of the Nampa and Meridian Irrigation District shared that his district holds monthly safety meetings on payday. So when his guys come in to pick up their checks, they hold a meeting.

In addition, every month, a different Nampa and Meridian Irrigation District employee leads a training exercise. I have incorporated that into our program. It is amazing how personal it becomes when a ditch rider has to present a training session to his peers. When someone does the research and writes it down, they really have to learn it.

Irrigation Leader

Pioneer employee Carl Hayes measuring flow in the Five-Mile Drain Feeder Canal, which feeds the Phyllis Canal. Pioneer measures flow every week during the irrigation season to ensure exact diversion charges to its storage accounts. This has proven to be very valuable in terms of storage use and chemical operations. The Five-Mile Drain Feeder Canal is used to supply drainage water in lieu of Boise River water.

Right now, we try to hold a safety meeting once a month. A lot of times, it takes place in the early morning: Our foreman will take everyone to breakfast at the Sunrise CafĂŠ and talk about safety issues. We have not gotten to the point where we are doing training videos, but that is what we want to do. We want our guys to have a hands-on component to safety training.

So our program has moved beyond just hard hats, steeltoed boots, and leather gloves. So far, the program has translated into lower premiums. It saves the district enough money to buy another vehicle or to lease another piece of equipment. In addition to knowing the crew is safe out there, the cost savings have started to get my attention.

on ditches and canals in remote areas isolated from the public. We had a situation in which one of our ditch riders needed assistance but was away from his vehicle. Now, our district-issued cell phones with the special app have a GPS tracker. When a ditch rider has been out of contact for some time, it lets me know where they are.

The app also accounts for paid time off, sick leave, and overtime. My employees have to enter sick days manually, so they get a sense of how much time they are using. We have seen decreases in how much time people are taking off because they see it for themselves. They can check their phone and know immediately. The app has made everyone more accountable.

Kris Polly: You have also introduced some human resources efficiencies into the district.

Kris Polly: What advice do you have for other managers looking at building up employees to become more efficient?

Mark Zirschky: We are now using an application on our cell phones for timekeeping. Every employee is issued a phone and has the app. So now, as soon as ditch riders step out the door of their house to start the day to tend a ditch, they clock in. The ditch riders can personalize the app by adding notes, recording how many miles they have driven in a day, or documenting how many gophers they may have trapped.

We moved away from two-way radios out of safety concerns. Our ditch riders were driving along or walking Irrigation Leader

Mark Zirschky: We all get very busy, so I don’t want to be a hypocrite, but you have to spend time with the employees and really talk with them. Get them to thinking about a switch in roles: What would they do in your shoes?

In addition, it is important to allow your employees to lead and feel like their ideas are important. We may all learn better ways of doing things by allowing our employees to be heard and think outside the box.

7

ADVERTISEMENT

ADVERTISEMENT

Securing Water for Idaho’s Future:

By Senator James Risch

L

Arrowrock Dam

ast year marked the 100th anniversary of Arrowrock Dam, Idaho’s own eighth wonder of the world.

This landmark, located on the Boise River complex, is a testament to the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation’s vision and hard work, both in the initial building of the structure and in the structure’s upkeep throughout the years.

Formerly the site of a private irrigation venture, Arrowrock Dam was the grandest project undertaken by Reclamation when construction began in 1912. The dam stands at 350 feet high and extends 1,150 feet long, with a record-breaking 527,300 cubic yards of concrete laid on the dam.

Dedicated just over 100 years ago, on October 4, 1915, this magnificent dam has set many records and has proven to be a popular tourist attraction, drawing approximately 12,000 visitors in its first week of operation. Arrowrock Dam warranted acclaim from across the country—even the world.

More importantly, Arrowrock Dam has allowed Idahoans not only to preserve our lands but also to thrive by providing needed irrigation water for agricultural uses and flood control management. While caring for the land shows a commitment to future generations, we are also able to responsibly use our resources to meet today’s needs.

This impressive structure, which managed to make the valley bloom like a rose a century ago, requires consistent management and infrastructure upgrades. The Treasure Valley has a growing and urgent need for an increased water supply, and Arrowrock has the potential to meet that need. It is not just consumers who depend on the dam— Idaho’s farmers and our nation’s food supply do, too.

Looking ahead, there is also an increasing need for better options to deal with probable floods in the evergrowing Boise regional area. While the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers has come to the decision that raising Arrowrock Dam is not cost effective, I believe that with collaboration, there is a viable path forward to solve these problems for the Boise region and the entire state of Idaho.

The great state of Idaho is positioned perfectly along Arrowrock Dam. Photo courtesy of the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation.

10

Irrigation Leader

Springtime releases at historic Arrowrock Dam. Photo courtesy of Dave Walsh, U.S. Bureau of Reclamation.

the western slopes of the continental mountain range to optimize water resources. I have the good fortune to sit on the U.S. Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources and on the Subcommittee on Water and Power, which allows me to work closely on water legislation that affects every American. Additionally, as an Idaho rancher, I understand western water priorities on a personal level. For all these reasons, I have actively worked with my colleagues in Washington on water legislation initiatives during my time in Congress.

For example, one of the best sources of renewable, clean energy is hydropower. We can modernize conventional water canals and irrigation ditches with new hydropower technology, but we need less federal bureaucracy and red tape. Specifically, Idaho’s canal companies and irrigation districts have the ability to expand agriculture projects, create new jobs, and generate new clean energy, but they should not be burdened by excessive government regulation and slowdowns. It is past time for hydropower to be recognized as a renewable energy source for federal projects.

I want to highlight a number of important federal legislative water priorities that are being considered this Congress that, in tandem with Idaho state water laws, are important to Idaho water constituents. First and foremost, I want to make certain that federal land management agencies act in accordance with state water laws. My Senate colleagues and I are also working to streamline the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission permitting Irrigation Leader

process for new water storage projects and to streamline forestry projects to protect fire-prone water supply watersheds. Aquifer recharge projects during spring flood run-off also remain a priority, as does allowing irrigation districts to prepay their Reclamation contracts if desired.

I also want to require the Army Corps to review dam operations in the West to ensure that current infrastructure is being fully used for multiuse purposes. Many of these initiatives are part of Senate Bill 2012, the Energy Policy and Modernization Act, which has been passed by the full Senate.

For more than a century, Idaho has been a leader in irrigation and the water industry. Despite the ongoing challenges of federal regulations and aging infrastructure, I remain committed to serving water constituents in our state and throughout the West. Be assured, I will continue to work toward getting the Energy Policy and Modernization Act signed into law before the end of the year, as it is time to reduce red tape and streamline the federal permitting process.

James Risch is a United States senator from the state of Idaho. Prior to his election to the United States Senate, he served as Idaho state senator, lieutenant governor, and governor. Senator Risch serves on five Senate committees, including the Energy and Natural Resources Committee.

11

: D R A W R O F G IN K O O L nning and Storage Western Water Pla

By Senator Jeff Flake

G

rowing up on a ranch in the northern part of Arizona, I know that water is always on the mind of Arizonans, and even more so during the ongoing drought. Fortunately for us, we benefit from a long history of forward-looking water policies that have enabled the state’s continued growth. However, we cannot simply rely on these past efforts; we have to continue to plan for our continued water security.

This month, I was pleased that the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee passed my Western Water Planning and Storage Enhancement Act (S. 2902), introduced along with Senators McCain, Barrasso, Risch, Daines, and Heller. This comprehensive drought legislation is a culmination of a multiyear process of working with stakeholders and water users to understand and prioritize water-related policies needed by Arizona at the federal level.

One component of this outreach was a year-long conversation on water from which I received invaluable feedback from users in Arizona. I took these responses and worked with our governor to better prioritize the interests of the state. This list includes a renewed commitment to the Colorado River System Conservation Program, clarifying the status of water voluntarily contributed to Lake Mead for system health, streamlining permitting for forest restoration activities, making better use of existing water storage facilities, and addressing the scourge of invasive tamarisk trees. Advancing these priorities greatly affects not only Arizona but also all western states, and I will continue to work to find a path forward for the Senate to consider drought legislation before the end of this year.

This legislation alone will not address our all our water issues, unfortunately. The Colorado River was headed toward a shortage declaration last year until an exceptionally wet “miracle May” kept us out of it. If a

Senator Flake speaking to a forum at the Kyl Center for Water Policy at Arizona State University’s Morrison Institute for Public Policy, April 2015.

12

Irrigation Leader

Senator Flake visiting Southern Avra Valley Recharge Project and Central Arizona Project's Tucson office and Twin Peaks Pumping Plant, March 2016.

shortage is declared on the Colorado River, Arizona will bear the brunt of the mandatory reductions. In response, Arizona water users have been participating in voluntary conservation programs, and by the end of this year, they will have saved an estimated 345,000 acre-feet of water in Lake Mead. However, it only makes sense for Arizona water users to participate in these voluntary programs if they are sure that the water they contribute actually remains in Lake Mead. There are concerns that the Law of the River has a loophole that gives the secretary of the interior the discretion to release some of Arizona’s conserved water for use in another state. Obviously, this would defeat the purpose of these programs and would likely lead to that water being stored underground in Arizona, depriving all states of the benefit of elevated Lake Mead levels.

I have worked to gain assurances for Arizona water users to ensure that their protection measures will have the intended effect. Most recently, I secured a commitment from the U.S. Department of the Interior that it would not release the conserved water without the consensus of all the states. This ensures that the continued participation in these important programs by Arizonans makes sense, and their efforts to keep Lake Mead from falling to Irrigation Leader

critically low levels will continue.

Although we have made great strides, we are not done. The Senate still needs to take action on drought legislation for the benefit of Arizona, California, and the rest of the West. In addition, the basin states are in the midst of developing the next round of agreements for voluntary reductions in Lake Mead supplies, and the current modification to the U.S.-Mexico water treaty is due to be renegotiated before the end of next year. We have shown that Arizona and the Colorado River basin states have the capability to meet these challenges, and I am confident that we can continue to build on past successes as we address tomorrow’s water needs.

Jeff Flake is a United States senator from the state of Arizona. Prior to his election to the United States Senate, he served in the U.S. House of Representatives from 2001–2013. Senator Flake serves on the Judiciary Committee, the Energy and Natural Resources Committee, and the Foreign Relations Committee, where he also serves as chairman of the Subcommittee on African Affairs.

13

ADVERTISEMENT

ADVERTISEMENT

MAXIMUM IRRIGATION EFFICIENCY

STARTS WITH YOUR PUMP AND WATERTRONICS Watertronics® is a leader in offering integrated pump systems solutions customized to your needs. Their pump stations and controls maintain consistent, surge-free water delivery for optimum pressure regulation thus reducing your energy costs and ensuring your irrigation system will work efficiently.

For more details, contact your local Watertronics dealer or visit www.watertronics.com.

WATERTRONICS, A LINDSAY COMPANY, PROVIDES: •

An integrated pump system engineered to save energy, water and labor

•

Complete pivot, pump and irrigation expertise

•

Systems delivered as a factory assembled and tested unit for fast installation

•

Collaboration with engineering firms

•

24-hour certified service and support

•

Full inventory of parts for minimal downtime

© 2015 Lindsay. All rights reserved. Watertronics is a registered trademark of the Lindsay Corporation.

Anderson Ranch Dam and Reservoir.

From Arrowrock to Anderson Ranch: Creating Storage for the Future in Idaho’s Treasure Valley

By Daren Coon

A

n individual needs to look at marginal proposals when discussing water storage. As Idaho’s population grows, those proposals become less marginal and much more viable. Irrigation leaders in the region have had the foresight to look 50 to 100 years into the future and have seen the need to create more water storage along the Boise River—not only for irrigation, but also for domestic consumption, industry, and flood control.

Since 1989, the Nampa and Meridian Irrigation District (NMID) has promoted the creation of additional storage along the Boise River.

Our Forefathers’ Foresight

Since the late 1800s, leaders in the Treasure Valley have continually sought to secure and enhance water supplies for the region. Prior to World War II, the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation crafted an elaborate plan to bring water from the Payette Division of the Boise Project via tunnels and open channels to what would become Anderson Ranch Dam. This water could then be transferred from Anderson

16

to other reservoirs. Although that larger plan did not come to fruition, Anderson Ranch Dam did. More recently, the Idaho Water Resources Board, with the support of NMID, investigated the potential for the development of the Twin Springs Dam, which was to be located on the middle fork of the Boise River as part of Reclamation’s Boise Project. Twin Springs lost momentum, however, due to environmental and other reasons, and attention shifted to other locations along the Boise River.

Raising the Dam

Another proposal to create more water storage was to raise the height of Arrowrock Dam. The 350-foot concrete structure was built to confine the Boise River above the city of Boise in 1915 and serves as one of the main reservoirs supplying the Treasure Valley. This idea is akin to taking a fairly good tooth, grinding it down, putting a cap over it and building it up. What kind of longevity can you expect from that kind of work?

To answer that question, Congress authorized funding to conduct a feasibility study regarding raising the height of Arrowrock within the Water Resources Development Irrigation Leader

Act (WRDA) of 1999, which called for a flood control study—that section of the WRDA was later amended (section 4038 of WRDA 2007) to add water supply and ecosystem restoration to the study.

In 2009, the Idaho Water Resources Board (IWRB) and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers signed off on an interim feasibility study to evaluate public safety concerns related to flooding and the potential for more water storage along the Boise River. The interim study indicated that raising Arrowrock would be the best option to address flood and water supply risks. The remainder of the study looked at hydrology and the estimated costs on a dam height increase of up to 74 feet.

The cost-benefit ratio was not in favor of raising the dam. On May 18, 2016, the Army Corps study team presented its findings to the IWRB Water Storage Committee; unfortunately, by putting the study obligation on the back of the Army Corps, Congress inadvertently dug a pitfall for the project. The Corps’ main concern is flood control, with additional storage a secondary concern. Reclamation, which deals in water storage and delivery, was more likely to have placed a higher value on the benefits of stored water for irrigation and residential delivery, along with flood control.

Looking Upriver

Some of us in the district knew that the Arrowrock proposal was not likely to succeed. Even if there was a glimmer of hope for the study to come out in favor of raising the dam, the project would have been multiple decades from completion. Consequently, at the same time we were discussing the Arrowrock idea, we were also discussing raising the height of Anderson Ranch Dam, which was completed in 1950 and holds a maximum capacity of 493,000 acre-feet of water.

In 2006, Reclamation issued the Boise/Payette Water Supply Assessment, which included raising Anderson Ranch Dam as an alternative to raising Arrowrock Dam. Reclamation is currently undertaking a feasibility study of raising the dam—not for flood control purposes, but for additional storage.

For all intents and purposes, raising Anderson Ranch is more viable than raising Arrowrock. While the amount of water gained from raising Anderson Ranch is really small compared to Arrowrock, the price points are very good—somewhere around $3,000 an acre-foot. A modest rise in height of 6 feet would create about 39,000 acrefeet of storage. The reservoir fills often enough that all the additional storage would be beneficial to the valley: A thousand acre-feet of water serves a lot of households and people. At that scale, the cost-benefit ratio becomes practical.

Irrigation Leader

Current Activities

NMID, fellow districts in the Treasure Valley, and the IWRB are in active pursuit of the Anderson project.

Fortunately, Reclamation has already done a lot of work on the project, so there is already a great deal of scientific and engineering information available. To move forward with the next level of study, we need to reach a 50 percent participation level from interested parties to share the costs.

We are currently just 7 or 9 percent short of reaching this goal. Reclamation is reaching out to potentially interested parties in the valley. We aim to reach that goal by late September. With the backing of NMID, which is the largest district in the state, and the city of Meridian, there is momentum in the right direction.

The Cost of Inaction

With the population of the Treasure Valley expected to grow by 2 million people in the next 100 years, the cost of inaction is profound. The ability to sustain a population of that size must be addressed prior to the need becoming critical. How long can you put off doing something before you find yourself in dire straits?

Without additional storage, the valley will have to pump more groundwater, which is a limited resource. The dams of the Boise River were built at a time when science was not focused on climate and how things would change over the centuries. Relative to today’s conditions and climate, those dams were constructed at a time when there was a lot of water.

Currently, we need more storage to accommodate two things: (1) climate change and (2) population growth. To do nothing would lead to disaster.

NMID, its fellow irrigation districts in the valley, and the IWRB spent years looking at Twin Springs. We have also spent years hoping for positive feedback regarding raising Arrowrock. The Arrowrock idea had quite a bit of momentum, but the Army Corps conducted its assessment and determined (within the agency’s frame of reference) that the costs of construction outweighed the benefits of flood control and water supply.

During the time that these ideas were being considered and rejected, however, we were continuing to look at all our options. As a result, we look forward to working with Reclamation to move on with the study of raising Anderson Ranch Dam and move down the path to construction.

Daren Coon is the secretary-treasurer and secretary of the board of the Nampa and Meridian Irrigation District. You can reach him at (208) 466-7861 or DCoon@nmid.org.

17

The Idaho Groundwater Settlement:

T

Law, Science, and Political Commitment

he Eastern Snake Plain Aquifer (ESPA) supplies water to 1 million irrigated acres and to thousands of homes and businesses in southern Idaho. A vital resource, the ESPA, which feeds the Snake River and nourishes the reservoirs that serve southern Idaho, has been integral to the development of agriculture, aquaculture, hydropower, and urban growth in the region.

However, the ESPA has experienced declines for decades, putting groundwater rights holders and surface water rights holders at odds.

Groundwater Declines

In the 1980s and 1990s, pumping, surface water efficiencies, and weather variability all contributed to declines in the aquifer. Then, in the early 2000s, Idaho suffered from extensive drought, exacerbating declines and reducing spring flows back into the Snake River. In 2004, the situation was so dire that the American Falls Reservoir failed to fill for the first time in recent history. Some surface water right storage holders did not receive a full allocation from the reservoir.

That led to the 2005 delivery call, pitting surface water user against groundwater user. Scott Bedke, speaker of the Idaho House of Representatives, explained, “A water call is a hard thing. . . . If a senior [water rights holder] is not getting his water, every junior [water rights holder] affecting the senior’s right has to shut off until the senior gets his water. In southern Idaho, that meant shutting hundreds of thousands of acres of irrigated agriculture, which accounts for 30 percent of the state’s economy. The economic pain that would cause was large.”

Working Out a Management Solution

Given the dire economic implications of the delivery call, the Idaho courts took their time to work out the issues between the parties. According to John Simpson, an attorney representing surface water users, “We had multiple treks to the [Idaho] Supreme Court to refine the methodology that the [Idaho] Department of Water Resources used in defining and identifying material injury to water users.”

Ultimately, addressing the depletions with storage water did not address the underlying problem. According to Mr. Simpson, “Storage water use did not address the needs of spring users, who relied upon water coming out of the aquifer at 58 degrees to deliver to aquaculture, or surface water coming out below Milner Dam and Thousand Springs Reach to satisfy the Swan Falls Agreement

18

obligations to the Idaho Power Company.” Further, senior surface water rights above Milner Dam suffered injury from depleted reach gains for irrigation supplies.

The state did have conjunctive management tools in place to help mitigate groundwater depletions, but, according to Mr. Simpson, “they were not specific enough to fully administer water rights between groundwater and surface water users and determine what material injury was and to identify how changing seasonal conditions could influence the amount owed.”

So in the 10 years from 2005 to 2015, the parties worked out the rules of the road in the Idaho Supreme Court. Through that process, the parties reached a point in 2015 where the aquifer just had not been satisfying the rights that were handed out by the state. Rather than chase mitigation with other sources like storage water, the parties realized it was time to fix the source—the aquifer.

Once those rules were set, everyone had risk. “And risk,” according to Mr. Simpson, “is what brings people to resolution.” For surface water and groundwater users, management, not curtailment, was the resolution.

Getting to Yes

Last year, 2015, was a watershed year in the development of a settlement agreement. With Speaker Bedke undertaking shuttle diplomacy between the groundwater rights holders and the surface water rights holders, the parties were able to articulate their wants and needs and find common ground.

The senior natural flow and storage rights holders did not want to be a disruptive force in the state economy but, at the same time, were entitled to their water. Those rights holders agreed to forestall their calls as long as the groundwater users mitigated groundwater depletions at the source. On the other hand, the junior rights holders using groundwater stepped up and taxed and assessed themselves to help them meet conservation benchmarks.

The agreement sets the ground rules for conserving and restoring the aquifer. Groundwater users, by 2026, must attain the average of the 1991 through 2001 groundwater levels in wells in the eastern half of the ESPA. That amounts to a 13 percent reduction in groundwater use by the groundwater rights holders. Along the way, there will be benchmarks and check-ins to ensure that the wells in question are on the path to recovery. Groundwater users can meet those benchmarks via managed recharge reduction in consumptive use and other conservation actions, with the assistance of state funding.

Irrigation Leader

Legal, Scientific, and Political Commitment

Legal, scientific, and political frameworks brought a type of depletion remediation to fruition that was acceptable to all parties. According to Speaker Bedke, the legal framework is best encapsulated by the words of poet Robert Frost: “Good fences make good neighbors.”

When property rights are well defined, neighbors get along.

Speaker Bedke acknowledged, “None of this could have happened if there were not a framework of law.

Good fences have been established by the [1987 Snake River Basin] adjudication and related law suits over the last 20-plus years. Water users have a good delineation of property rights and whose responsibility it is under the [Idaho] constitution in a time of shortage.” Within that framework, it was possible to conclude that water users were taking more water out of the aquifer than was going in naturally or through managed recharge.

The scientific framework was just as critical as the legal framework for the quantification of depletions and legal responsibilities. Following the start of the Snake River basin adjudication, the Idaho legislature directed the Idaho Department of Water Resources to create a model of the ESPA back in the early 1990s. That model is under refinement even today, 20 years after it began.

According to Mr. Simpson, the model clearly indicates “that we have had continual decline [in the ESPA] since the mid-1980s, which has meant an inadequate water supply for everyone.”

Speaker Bedke explained, “With a model, you are able to ask all the ‘what if ’ questions and get a pretty good answer back. All the cause and effect of everyone’s actions can be quantified via this model. You have to have assurances that if you do x, then you can expect y. It doesn’t matter which side of the issue you are on; everyone has stipulated that this is the best science.

Everyone has agreed that the model calls the balls and strikes.”

With legal and scientific underpinnings in place, and a settlement agreement in hand, Idaho’s legislators were empowered to dedicate money to support conservation and conjunctive management on an ongoing basis in an unprecedented way.

The Idaho legislature committed to a one-time appropriation of $16 million to level out construction schedules and then allocated $5 million from the general fund that will supplement the ongoing actions of the groundwater districts. The legislature empowered the state water board to set project funding standards and expectations.

The funding will be available for every water resource in all of Idaho, not just the ESPA. For Mr. Simpson, “This can be a template for other aquifers throughout

Irrigation Leader

the state. That is the leadership that the legislature provided.”

Next Steps

The most immediate effects of settlement implementation will be felt at the groundwater-district level. For Idaho’s groundwater irrigators, who account for two-thirds of irrigated water use in the states and are already on the cutting edge of water conservation, the major change moving forward is measurement. According to Speaker Bedke, “There were many areas in the state lacking monitoring devices on wells. As part of the agreement, everything is measured.”

One of the challenges of settlement implementation is ensuring that water users that benefit from the ESPA participate in remediation. There are water users that fall outside the nine groundwater districts administering and overseeing remediation and recharge actions.

Speaker Bedke noted, “Groundwater rights [holders] had variable priority dates, some as early as early as the late 1940s and some as late as the early 1990s. The settlement left it up to the individual groundwater districts to work the participation issue out. For the surface water irrigators, the main concern is hitting the benchmarks . . . however the groundwater districts chose to do it.”

At the same time, according to Mr. Simpson, there has been a lot of discussion about developing a management plan as a mechanism to meet the existing demand and provide the opportunity for continued economic growth.

A plan would provide the Idaho Department of Water Resources with the power to say everyone who derives a benefit from this resource has an obligation to participate in sustaining this resource. For Mr. Simpson, “The management plan is the future of Idaho.”

Commitment and Dedication

Speaker Bedke stressed, “Allocating scarce resources is a challenge. There were hard feelings here—I don’t want to downplay it—but both sides were saying the exact same thing. It was essential that we had a group of people willing to sit down until the process was over. We also had the political commitment to see long-term vision through: Your leaders need to take a 50-year view and not a 5-month view.”

Indeed, reaching agreement required dedication at all levels. Mr. Simpson stressed that it was “because of the leadership of the governor’s office in asserting the need for sustainability policy, of the water users for recognizing the need to sustain their water resources, and of the legislature for taking the sustainability issue and generating funding for projects and opportunities for partnerships, that now Idaho really has the ability to direct its future.”

19

Ï€ OVER 160 GLOVE STYLES ALWAYS IN STOCK

1-800-295-5510

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

Bridging the gap between idea + achievement

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

slh@lclaw-nm.com

Offices worldwide

hdrinc.com

Bringing (Water) Balance to the Valley: The Westlands Drainage Settlement

By Johnny Amaral

F

or more than half a century, the farmers of the Westlands Water District in the western San Joaquin Valley in central California have put the valley’s productive soils to prodigious use, growing a variety of fruits, grains, and vegetables. Indeed, Westlands’ farmers produce more than $1 billion of food and fiber for the nation, and more than 50,000 people depend on Westlands’ agricultural economy for their livelihood. The region’s productivity and economy, however, have been seriously affected by the federal government’s failure to properly manage drainage water within the San Luis Unit of the Bureau of Reclamation’s Central Valley Project (CVP). That failure, in turn, has resulted in approximately 30 years of litigation between Westlands and its landowners, and the United States.

Fortunately, in late 2015 Westlands and the United States reached a settlement that would resolve the decades of litigation over the United States’ failure to provide drainage. Reaching the settlement will save the American taxpayers several billion dollars and provide a clear path forward for the management of drainage water within Westlands in the future.

Background

The Drainage Problem In 1960, Congress passed the San Luis Act, which authorized construction of the operation of the San Luis Unit as part of the CVP with the principal purpose of furnishing water to irrigate land in three counties in central California. Because irrigation and drainage are inherently linked, drainage is often necessary to maintain a long-term sustainable salt and water balance in the root zone of crops.

To avoid damaging valuable crops, the water that is not consumed by plants must be drained away and flushed from the root zones of the crops. Consequently, the San Luis Act expressly conditioned the construction of the San Luis Unit on the provision for drainage facilities.

With the legal obligation on the United States to provide drainage to the lands served by the San Luis Unit, Reclamation began construction of a drainage system—Kesterson Reservoir and a drain—in the late 1970s. The facilities were shut down, however, due to high concentrations of naturally occurring selenium that were harming wildlife.

With the drainage system on hold, Westlands acted quickly to facilitate the remediation of its saturated lands.

22

More than 95 percent of Westlands farmers use some form of advanced irrigation management techniques, such as this buried drip irrigation line in a cantaloupe field.

The Irrigation Improvement Program provided $1 million to Westlands’ growers to increase irrigation effectiveness and reduce deep percolation. Westlands invested an additional $8 million on drainage technology research, including land application, evaporation and solar ponds, biological selenium removal, a deep injection well, and upper zone pumping. Together with its water conservation program, Westlands’ efforts have bought the growers some time and helped to reduce the adverse effects of inadequate drainage. Although these practices have proven beneficial, the drainage problem in the San Luis Unit remains significant.

Lawsuits By the mid-1990s, Westlands and its farmers could no longer bear the costs of inadequate drainage and filed suit against the United States to uphold its statutory obligations. In 2000—a full 35 years after the execution of water delivery and construction repayment contracts between Reclamation and Westlands—the Ninth Circuit ruled that the United States had an unexcused statutory duty to provide drainage service to the San Luis Unit.

On remand, the trial court issued an injunction requiring the United States to provide drainage service “without delay” to the San Luis Unit. Seven years later, in 2007, Reclamation issued a record of decision that selected a drainage alternative that would meet the drainage service requirements of the court’s injunctions. The cost to implement the plan, according the federal government, is approximately $3.8 billion (2015 dollars).

Because no significant progress had been made on Reclamation’s 2007 drainage plan, in 2011 a group of individual landowners in Westlands brought a class action in the Court of Federal Claims against the United States on the grounds that the federal government’s failure to provide drainage service to their lands resulted in a physical Irrigation Leader

taking of their property without just compensation.

In 2013, the Court of Federal Claims denied the government’s motion to dismiss the complaint and was extremely critical of the federal government’s failure to provide drainage. According to the United States, its potential liability could be as high as $2 billion. See Testimony of John Bezdek, Counselor to the Deputy Secretary, U.S. Department of the Interior, Before the U.S. House of Representatives Committee on Natural Resources, Subcommittee on Water, Power and Oceans on H.R. 4366 (May 24, 2016).

In 2012, Westlands filed an action against the United States for breach of Westlands 1963 Water Service and 1965 Repayment contracts for failure to provide drainage. The Court of Claims dismissed the action, ruling that the contracts did not contain an enforceable promise to provide drainage. Westlands has appealed that decision to the federal circuit. Both actions have been stayed in order to allow the parties to finalize their settlement.

Since then, both parties have worked diligently to amicably resolve their differences and find a permanent drainage solution for the San Luis Unit. In 2015, the parties executed a settlement agreement that would finally resolve the drainage matter. But, in order for the settlement to become effective, Congress must enact legislation authorizing the settlement.

To that end, on January 12, 2016, Representative Valadao (R-CA) introduced the San Luis Unit Drainage Resolution Act, H.R. 4366, to authorize the settlement. On May 12, 2016, Representative Costa (D-CA) introduced a similar version of the legislation, H.R. 5217. On May 24, 2016, the U.S. House of Representatives Committee on Natural Resources, Subcommittee on Water, Power, and Oceans, held a hearing on the bills. Both the United States and Westlands testified in favor of the settlement legislation.

The Nuts and Bolts of the Settlement

If the settlement legislation is enacted, the settlement would do the following: • Settle the above litigation and statutorily relieve the United States of its multibillion-dollar statutory and court-ordered drainage obligation.

• Require Westlands to manage drainage water within its boundaries, in accordance with federal and California law, and provide the U.S. Department of the Interior the right to cease water deliveries to Westlands if it fails to do so. o To conduct drainage, Westlands will use a mix of measures that will depend on the varying needs within the drainage-impaired areas, and these measures will evolve as

Irrigation Leader

conditions change. These measures include elements identified in Reclamation’s own drainage plan, such as land retirement, source control through more efficient irrigation practices, and collection and reuse of shallow groundwater. o The legislation expressly prohibits Westlands from discharging drainage water outside its service area.

Require Westlands to indemnify the United States for • any damages and pay compensation for landowner claims arising out of the takings litigation.

• Relieve Westlands of its existing approximate $375 million repayment obligation for CVP construction charges.

• Relieve Westlands of the Reclamation Reform Act provisions relating to acreage limitations and full-cost pricing.

Require Westlands to permanently retire 100,000 acres of • land within its boundaries and instead use the land for the following purposes: o management of drainage water, including irrigation of reuse areas o renewable energy projects o upland habitat restoration projects o other uses subject to the consent of the United States

Require Westlands to assume title to certain facilities • owned by the United States.

• Authorize the secretary of the interior to convert Westlands’ existing water service contract entered into under section 9(e) of the Reclamation Project Act of 1939 to a repayment contract under section 9(d) of the same act (Westlands’ allocation is still subject to limitations on CVP operations under applicable state and federal law).

Cap Westlands’ CVP water deliveries at 75 percent of its • contract amount.

• Would not affect other CVP contractors.

Benefiting the Public and the Farmers

The settlement agreement has been decades in the making.

It will go a long way toward sustaining an already efficient and productive agricultural area in a financially responsible and environmentally beneficial manner. The major terms of the settlement have been public for more than two years and have been thoroughly vetted by policy experts, the administration, Congress, and interested stakeholders.

In the end, the settlement relieves the government of an obligation, with a potential taxpayer savings of more than $5.8 billion. And, for Westlands, the settlement closes the book on a long chapter of uncertainty around the management of drainage water and drainage-affected lands.

Johnny Amaral is deputy general manager of external affairs for the Westlands Water District. You can reach Mr. Amaral at jamaral@westlandswater.org.

23

Managing Western Water During Times of Climate Uncertainty

By Katharine Dahm, Avra Morgan, and David Raff

C

limate change is a growing risk to effective western water management. It will affect all aspects of water resources management, including water supplies, water quality, water demands, and environmental conditions.

Moreover, western river basins rely on good quality water for agricultural production and human and environmental health. Without quality water, many issues with salinity, permeability, and toxicity can arise. Not only that, irrigation practices can influence water quality as well—leaving lands and reentering groundwater and surface water supplies.

It is not yet fully known how changes to natural runoff processes and irrigated agriculture responses as a result of climate change will affect water quality; however, in light of these uncertainties and challenges, the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation is collaborating with others to identify appropriate adaptive actions that add resiliency and reliability to water management planning and practices.

Reclamation, along with the U.S. Geological Survey, the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, are identifying and adapting to climate change challenges on water resources.

Preparing for Climate Change Challenges

The effects of climate change are already being felt across the West; it poses a fundamental challenge to Reclamation’s mission and the national economy. As a result, Reclamation and its water management partners must be prepared to respond to shifts in the baseline of what is considered normal for drought, floods, water availability, and future water demands.

Key observations and projections relevant to western water management include the following: • Temperature increases have resulted in decreased snowpack, differences in the timing and volume of spring runoff, and an increase in peak flows for some western U.S. basins. Observed increases in mean annual temperature have been approximately 2°F since 1900. Continued warming of roughly 5 to 7°F,

24

depending on location, is projected over the course of the 21st century (see figure).

• Precipitation changes are also expected, interacting with warming to increase the duration and frequency of droughts and resulting in larger and more numerous floods, varying by basin. The increased intensity of droughts and floods raises concerns about infrastructure safety, the resiliency of species and ecosystems to these changes, and the ability to maintain adequate levels of hydropower production.

In western regions, projected climate-driven changes in water supply (quantities and timing) as well as increased demands for water may strain existing infrastructure and operations that were made to meet water needs, not only for consumptive uses like agricultural, municipal, and industrial activities, but also for hydropower, flood control, fisheries, wildlife, recreation, and other largely nonconsumptive water-related benefits.

Climate Change Effects on Water Quality

As the climate changes, water quality will depend on multiple variables, including water temperature; the rate, volume, and timing of runoff; and the physical characteristics of the watershed.

Potential effects on water quality across the West include increasing water temperature, pollutants, turbidity, and sediment. The focus of climate change science today has been on primary forcings of the hydrologic system, including temperature and precipitation, and the understanding of subsequent effects to water quality remains in its infancy.

Irrigation Leader

Projected Changes to Temperature and Precipitation at the End of the 21st Century Figure represents the median change from a large collection of WCRP’s Coupled Model Intercomparison Project phase 5 climate projections spatially downscaled over the United States. Temperatures are shown to increase throughout the West by 2–5°C. Mean annual precipitation is largely expected to increase for much of the western United States, with the exception of the Southwest, where precipitation is expected to decrease by 5–20 percent.

Underscoring this point, a scholarly article reviewing climate adaptation strategies for agricultural water management in Europe identified approximately three dozen papers focused on changes in water availability—but only seven focused on the deterioration of water quality in rivers and aquifers and soil erosion. Although neither list is all inclusive and the focus of the conclusions were for Europe, the story is indicative of the current state of knowledge.

As our confidence and understanding of how to work within the uncertainties of water availability increases, more attention is being provided to the areas that have equal yet less-understood effects on irrigated agriculture.

As water warms, less oxygen dissolves in water, affecting the waterbody’s ability to support fisheries and other aquatic life. In addition, higher water temperatures can increase the incidence of toxic algal blooms occurring in reservoirs and other waterbodies. Where runoff decreases without a corresponding reduction in pollutants, maintenance of acceptable water quality will become more difficult, especially during periods of low flow. Increases in the frequency and intensity of high-precipitation events will also increase the runoff of pollutants into waterbodies. Where storm intensity and severity increases, there is a corresponding increase in land surface erosion, sediment transport, and occurrences of elevated surface water turbidity.

Also, an increase in the frequency, extent, and intensity of forest fires associated with temperature- or droughtstressed forests will increase sediment production and surface water turbidity.

Irrigation Leader

Climate Change Legislation

The SECURE Water Act of 2009 provides authority so federal water and science agencies can collaborate with each other, states, and local water managers to plan for climate change. The act recognizes that “climate change poses a significant challenge to the protection of adequate and safe supplies of water, which are fundamental to the health, economy, security, and ecology of the United States.”

The act directs Reclamation to submit reports to Congress—two years after enactment and every five years thereafter—describing the progress in carrying out those activities.

As identified in the SECURE Water Act Report to Congress, specific examples of potential climate change effects on water quality across the major western river basins include the following: • Columbia River basin: In many locations, reservoir spill (over spillways or through outlet tubes) generates total dissolved gas at levels that are potentially lethal to downstream fish populations. Projections for larger or earlier peak flows may require increased spill, which can adversely affect downstream fisheries.

• Rio Grande basin: In the Rio Grande above the confluence of the Rio Grande with the Rio Puerco, projections indicate that concentrations of pollutants are expected to increase with increased surface water evaporation rates and more intense precipitation events.

• Sacramento and San Joaquin River basins: Sea-level change is also an important factor in assessing the effect of climate change on California’s water resources, specifically on water quality in the Sacramento–San Joaquin Delta. Higher mean sea level is associated 25

with increasing salinity in the delta, which influences the suitability of its water for agricultural, urban, and environmental uses.

• Truckee River basin: Meeting water quality standards in the lower Truckee River is expected to be more difficult to maintain as natural flows recede in the late summer.

Climate Change Adaptation and Coordination

Reclamation, in consultation with its customers and stakeholders, has already begun to identify and develop a variety of adaptation strategies to address vulnerabilities related to drought and climate change in western river basins.

Reclamation released its Climate Change Adaptation Strategy, which identified four goals relevant to agricultural water quality: 1. Increase water management flexibility.

2. Enhance climate adaptation planning.

3. Improve infrastructure resiliency.

4. Expand information sharing.

Many of the activities identified to achieve these goals should mitigate the effects of climate change on water quality.

For example, the WaterSMART Basin Study Program is a key avenue of collaboration and coordination between Reclamation and nonfederal partners, including state water resource agencies, regional water authorities, local planning agencies, water districts, agricultural associations, environmental interests, cities and counties, and tribal governments. As of today, Reclamation and its partners have initiated 24 basin studies in 15 of the 17 western states and 12 basin studies have been released.

Basin studies evaluate current and future climate change effects and identify multiple options to address water supply and demand imbalances. Adaptation strategies identified that may mitigate the effects of climate change on water quality include the following: • Aquifer recharge efforts in the Yakima River are expected to enhance instream flows and improve summer water temperatures in downstream river reaches.

• The Colorado River Moving Forward effort, a follow-on to the Colorado River Basin Study, identifies seven major opportunities to advance environmental benefits in the basin.

• The Santa Fe Basin Study noted the success of prescribed burning in the upper Santa Fe River watershed to reduce the risk of catastrophic wildfire.

• Adaptation actions identified in the Sacramento and San Joaquin River Basins Study include portfolios that improve environmental and water quality in the Central Valley and upper watershed areas, such as additional spring releases that resemble unimpaired

26

runoff and additional delta outflows in the fall to reduce salinity.

Increased efficiencies on farms and in water conveyance systems are supported through WaterSMART water and energy efficiency grants and will help reduce both the stresses that may be put on irrigated agriculture by water delivered to the farm as well as any irrigated agriculture effects. The total supply of water available to meet user needs often can be augmented through one or more possible actions, including water reuse and desalination.

In 2017, Reclamation will expand its Cooperative Watershed Management Program to fund on-the-ground watershed management projects that build ecological resiliency, including projects that improve channel structure and complexity, restore riparian vegetation, prevent the spread of invasive species, and address water quality.

These types of programs can serve to increase efficiency, augment supplies, and improve water quality for a variety of possible purposes, including municipal and industrial use, agricultural use, power generation, groundwater recharge, environmental restoration, maintenance of fish and wildlife habitat, and recreation.

Given the important partner equities in water resources management, Reclamation has a responsibility to demonstrate leadership and to leverage its resources by sharing information and capabilities with partners interested in climate adaptation. Reclamation recognizes that for federal investments in climate resiliency to be successful, strong partnerships with federal agencies; state, tribal, and local governments; and water users, stakeholders, and the public are crucial.

Reclamation is actively engaged in multiple collaborative efforts with federal and nonfederal partners to monitor, develop, and share information for a common understanding of the effects of climate change on water resources in the West. Together, these activities will allow Reclamation to better assess the risks and effects of climate change on the hydrological cycle and to implement collaborative adaptation strategies.

Katharine Dahm and Avra Morgan are program analysts in policy and administration at the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation. David Raff is a science advisor at the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation. You can reach Ms. Morgan at aomorgan@usbr.gov, Ms. Dahm at kdahm@usbr.gov, and Mr. Raff at draff@usbr.gov.

Irrigation Leader

INDUSTRY STANDARD SINCE 1955

ECONOMICAL • DURABLE • RELIABLE

IRRIGATION WATER MEASUREMENT Mc® Propeller Flow Meter

Water Specialties Propeller Meter™

Agriculture’s Best Selling Propeller Meter for over 60 Years

Engineered to Deliver Superior Performance • Time Tested • Rugged Design • Quality Construction

• Easy to Install • Easy to Operate • Easy to Field Service

Surface Water Propeller Model Manufactured with Proven Design Features

McCrometer, Inc.

3255 W. Stetson Ave., Hemet, CA 92545 (800) 220 - 2279 | www.mccrometer.com

Surface Water Reverse Propeller Model with Debris Shedding Design

CONTACT US TODAY FOR DETAILS

McCrometer Great Plains

115 South 16th St., Aurora, NE 68818

(888) 501 - 0019 | www.mccrometergreatplains.com

DITCH RIDER PROFILE: Nick Granden, Pioneer Irrigation District

N

obody understands how water reaches a field better than an irrigation district’s ditch rider. Inspecting miles of canals and ditches seven days a week during irrigation season, the ditch rider provides a ground-level understanding of district operations. In Irrigation Leader’s inaugural ditch rider profile, senior writer, John Crotty, spoke with the Pioneer Irrigation District’s Nick Granden.

Mr. Granden has been with the district for five years. Prior to taking the position, he worked in customer service and public relations for a local tire store. For Mr. Granden, irrigation was not wholly unfamiliar: His family irrigated 50 acres of hay on a rental property near Caldwell, Idaho. As a boy, he and his older brother attended two wheel lines and four hand lines every morning during irrigation season. What he did not know at the time was that he would move from being a water user to a water provider.

John Crotty: Please describe a day on the job.

Nick Granden: At Pioneer, we are a little different. We do our rides twice a day. For six months straight, I wake up at 5 o’clock every morning. I go out and take gauge readings. Then, all seven ditch riders get on a conference call with Mark [Zirschky] to give him our gauge readings and water orders for that day and the next day.

I also ride the ditch. On a normal day, I drive around 80 miles, covering both agricultural and residential deliveries. That involves going through and seeing whether our headgates are clear of debris and making sure all our adjustments got through.

I check to see whether I have to send more water down or make a cut: I have to drop some boards or pull some boards to make an adjustment. I usually do that in the morning.

Typically, I am off for a couple hours in the afternoon, so I can do what I need to do and then I am back in the afternoon to finish it up. When I come back out in the afternoon, I check gauges and send them to Mark.

I also take flood calls or answer any questions patrons may have.

That is kind of my day in a nutshell.

John Crotty: What happens during a flood call?

Nick Granden: There are a whole variety of things. For example, a homeowner’s riser cap will bust, and he will have no way to shut it off. I go out and find the source of the water, divert it, and either send it down a different lateral or shut the whole lateral off. Or sometimes a homeowner’s neighbor is overwatering the lawn and the homeowner thinks that he is being flooded out.

The bulk of my flood calls come in right at the beginning of the season. Equipment has been sitting over the winter, and people haven’t done the necessary repairs that they thought they had more time to do. After that, the volume of calls flattens out.

John Crotty: What happens in the off-season?

28

Nick Granden: We go out on the maintenance crew in the winter. We do any maintenance that is required in the district: repairing headgates, pouring concrete, liner projects, making concrete boxes, and installing pipe. We haven’t really hired anything out. We pretty much do everything in-house.

John Crotty: Have you picked up some new skills since you started?

Nick Granden: Absolutely. I got my CDL [commercial driver license], so I know how to drive a semi. I can also run a CAT with a sloper on it.

I had never done concrete work before in terms of building boxes and projects like that. For those liner projects, we will lay down 100 yards of concrete in a day. I’ve definitely picked up a lot of new skills.

I brought my customer service and public relations skills from the tire company to this job, and they have helped me.

Disagreements over water can get heated. When you have someone screaming and cussing in your face, you try to defuse the situation as best you can and explain what is going on. On the other hand, I realize that this water is a farmer’s living. It’s their bread and butter. They are generally good about finding a middle ground.

John Crotty: What is the most challenging part of the job?

Nick Granden: Dealing with homeowners who don’t understand how our system works. Pioneer has no responsibility for lines or ditches on private property. You try to explain to people that it is a private line, and often they don’t understand.

People get upset when they have planted seed or new sod, and they go to turn on their valve and nothing comes out. I try to walk them through it.

John Crotty: Has the district changed much in your five years on the job?

Nick Granden: When I first started, we all drove our personal rigs and were paid by the amount of miles that we drove. Just this year, the district provided us with company rigs. It is pretty hard to complain about driving a brand new truck.

The district also started giving us time off. We get seven days off during the irrigation season. We can use those days however we want. However, if water is in the ditch, someone has to be there. When the water comes in, you’re on until it goes out.

Irrigation Leader

ADVERTISEMENT

ADVERTISEMENT

Over 22 million feet of USA canal successfully repaired for the long haul.

AquaLastic® is a tried and tested brand. It’s safe and effective and it does the job right for a lasting repair.

Askof about our different versions repaired for different field It just keeps getting better!

Over 22 million feet USA canalAquaLastic® successfully forconditions. the long haul.

USA Technology and USA made.

AquaLastic® is a tried and tested brand. It’s safe and effective and it does the job right for a lasting repair.

Ask about our AquaLastic® versions for LLC. differentwww.fixcanal.com field conditions. It just keeps getting better!

AquaLastic® is different a product of Hydro Consulting Tel 509-467-8487 E Mail customerservice@fixcanal.com USA Technology and USA made.

Online quote tool available for an effective, quick reply. Or ask for an informational webinar for your team.

AquaLastic® is a product of Hydro Consulting LLC. www.fixcanal.com Tel 509 467 8487 E Mail customerservice@fixcanal.com Online quote tool available for an effective, quick reply. Or ask for an informational webinar for your team.

Irrigation Leader and Municipal Water Leader magazines will sponsor a Water Leader Educational Tour of irrigation and other water related infrastructure in New Zealand. The preliminary tour dates are February 18-25, 2017.

Please note that we will award two special door prizes—credits (in the form of a reimbursement) to be applied to the Water Leader Educational Tour of New Zealand—at our annual Operations and Management Workshop at the Crowne Plaza Phoenix Airport Hotel, Arizona, on February 1 and 2, 2017.

2017 New Zealand Water Leader Educational Tour

For details of the tour itinerary as well as estimated per person costs, please see our web site at www.WaterStrategies.com.

Companies that have expressed interest in participating and sponsoring the tour include: • Alligare • Rubicon Water • Watertronics Should you be interested in receiving information about the tour as a potential participant or your company is interested in being a sponsor, please e-mail Kris Polly at Kris.Polly@WaterStrategies.com and we will add you to our information distribution list.

ADVERTISEMENT

RIVERSCREEN

Built for shallow water pumping A rotating self-cleaning screen that dependably delivers good water from as little as 4 inches depth!

Riverscreen is the ideal solution for operations that depend upon surface water for irrigation purposes. They have also been used in other scenarios such as food processing, power plants wet yards, pipeline testing, and many more.

The Riverscreen was designed for shallow water pumping, to help prevent pumping sand and other debris. Our gravity fed Riverscreen is designed to work on floating or submersible pumps and wet wells. Low maintenance operation. Lightweight aluminum design. Standard on all Riverscreen’s is #8 304 stainless steel mesh. Other sizes available upon request.

Works great in livestock lagoons.

See it in action at www.riverscreen.com!

Contact us

with the specifics of your operation…

We’ll help you get more dependable water from your source.

1919 Kiowa Road | Clay Center, KS 67432 Office: 785-632-5452 | Fax: 785-632-6141 Sales: jessica@riverscreen.com Sales: joe@riverscreen.com Service: bob@riverscreen.com

Water Law Sustaining Irrigation District Functions in an Urbanizing Landscape

By Andrew J. Waldera

B

“

uild it and they will come.” Most will recall the familiar refrain from the movie “Field of Dreams,” but the saying applies equally to irrigation districts in the Boise Valley. And boy, are they coming—in droves. What started out as sagebrush desert transitioned into highly productive agricultural land and is further transitioning into sprawling communities along the Boise River: Boise, Caldwell, Eagle, Garden City, Kuna, Meridian, and Nampa, to name the largest. The Boise Valley was home to approximately 450,000 people in 2000. Now, it is home to an estimated 660,000 and growing. With that population growth brings changing demands and urban encroachment on irrigation districts and their infrastructure—but the end delivery goal remains the same: delivering irrigation water as cost effectively, efficiently, and safely as possible. This is no different for the Pioneer Irrigation District, which supplies irrigation water to approximately 34,000 acres of highly productive agricultural lands and rapidly urbanizing lands in and around the communities of Nampa and Caldwell, Idaho.

towns, cities, counties, and highway districts, many with different missions that do not always necessarily dovetail with the missions and policies of irrigation districts that share the same land masses. Towns, cities, and counties want development—jobs, tax revenue, residential dwellings. Highway districts build, operate, and maintain the roads and bridges that development demands.

Development-driven policies and activities seek to bury pipe or relocate open ditches to free the ground surface for other uses. Sometimes this piping

Overlapping Jurisdictions and Potentially Competing Uses

Increasingly urbanized areas bring more people. In turn, those people bring many different social values and opinions regarding the best use of property. Those same people also bring more local government activity:

32

Irrigation Leader

or relocation can be beneficial to the irrigation district; oftentimes, it is not. As a general matter, open earthen ditches are easier to maintain, and they were located where they were for a reason—typically higher lines for proper fall to avoid pumping as much as possible. Pipes are expensive; they are more prone to plugging, they leak, and they eventually wear out. Pipes also free up the ground surface, bringing structures and other improvements in closer proximity to the irrigation facilities, making failing or leaking pipes that much more problematic and expensive, both in terms of replacement and damage caused by flooding. Facility relocation and burying, if not done carefully, can jeopardize fall, impede flow or head, and adversely affect deliveries. And, utilities crisscrossing irrigation facilities both above and below ground bring their own challenges and issues.

Development also begets more and more impervious surfaces (roof tops, streets, sidewalks, and driveways) that significantly alter stormwater runoff patterns in terms of quantity, timing, and water quality. Clean Water Act stormwater regulations and MS4 National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permits demonstrate as much. In many locations, channeling stormwater discharges to irrigation facilities is the cheapest and most efficient means of stormwater disposal. But that means of collection and disposal raises ditch capacity and water quality concerns, as well as additional regulatory or permitting concerns, and can greatly hinder ditch maintenance opportunities and schedules during the nonirrigation season.

Socially, urbanites seek greenbelts and recreational opportunities along irrigation facilities. Real estate marketing materials often characterize canals and drains as “seasonal creeks,” emphasizing aesthetics and riparian pathways.

Drains, in particular, can look quite natural, given their typically less-regular maintenance when compared to delivery canals and laterals. It is not uncommon for urbanites to desire vegetation along irrigation facilities and the fish and wildlife that come with it— all things that do Irrigation Leader

not necessarily mesh with irrigation district function and policy.

In general, most irrigation facilities are grounded in easement, as opposed to fee simple ownership.

Consequently, irrigation easements under Idaho law are typically nonexclusive. Idaho statutes enacted to protect irrigation facilities from haphazard and unauthorized encroachment, such as Idaho Code sections 42-1102, 42-1207, and 42-1209, require proposed encroachers to obtain the prior written permission of the irrigation (or drainage) entities before piping, relocating, crossing, or encroaching. However, those same statutes speak in terms of “unreasonable or material interference”—undefined terms to this point—which suggests that some interference falling short of unreasonable or material must be absorbed by irrigation districts and other irrigation and drainage entities. Not surprisingly, what constitutes unreasonable or material interference can mean different things to different people. Thus, protecting the integrity and function of irrigation (and drainage) facilities in urbanizing areas can be as much an art as it is a science. Erring on the side of caution and conservatism is imperative for irrigation districts and other like entities because they, as the ultimate facility owners, are the ones primarily liable for delivery upsets and other facility failures (i.e., flooding damages).

See, e.g., I.C. §§ 421201–04.

Risk Management

Because irrigation districts and other ditch-owning and-operating entities are the ones primarily liable when something goes wrong, they are provided the initial review and “prior written permission” protections of the pertinent statutes. See, e.g., Pioneer Irr. Dist. v. City of 33

Caldwell, 153 Idaho 593 (2012). This said, Idaho law also imposes on irrigation districts a “reasoned” decisionmaking process requirement. Id. So, while irrigation districts enjoy the initial discretion to determine what constitutes unreasonable or material interference, that discretion may be subject to judicial challenge. Id. In short, irrigation districts cannot simply say “no” for the sake of saying “no”; rather, they must have valid reasons for doing so. And, provided they do undertake a reasoned analysis, those decisions are entitled to deference on judicial review. Id. When navigating the territory between interference that may arguably be acceptable and that which is unreasonable or material, license agreements (evidencing statutory written permission requirements) are the typical tool of choice. Integral provisions within those agreements are various indemnity clauses, warranty clauses, easement recognition or formalization provisions, and compliance with the Pioneer Irrigation District’s own professional engineering standards and specifications.

Typical Pioneer indemnity provisions require hold harmless, defense, and indemnity against any licensee acts or omissions that cause a hazard or damage to persons or property; interrupt or interfere with facility water flow; impair facility function; or obstruct facility (or corresponding easement) access. The construction season is typically restricted to the nonirrigation season, and Pioneer retains the right to complete the work and bill the licensee to ensure that the project is completed prior to the next irrigation season.

Pioneer also routinely imposes a three-year warranty period on pipes and other improvements that are constructed as part of a project but will ultimately be owned, operated, and maintained by the district postcompletion. It is also not uncommon to require landowners to bear end-of-life pipe/buried conduit 34

rehabilitation and replacement costs as provided in I.C. § 42-1207.

Proposed stormwater encroachments must favor drains over delivery facilities, be NPDES permit compliant, and abide by a calculated predevelopment flow rate runoff coefficient designed to mimic the historical runoff expected from a parcel in its unimproved (or nonurban) state. In those instances where predevelopment runoff historically entered a delivery facility, the applicant/licensee is required to estimate what it would cost to discharge to the nearest drain rather than continuing to discharge to a delivery facility even at the predevelopment flow rate. The preference for drains is simply a function of their markedly larger capacity and “drainage” purpose; delivery facilities often lack available freeboard, and they decrease in size as they progress to maintain delivery head.

As with typical license agreements, stormwater encroachment agreements also contain various indemnity provisions covering similar acts or omissions described above. However, perhaps a unique provision in the context of stormwater discharge is additional indemnity for changes in regulatory landscape (including judicial decisions) that may require Pioneer to further regulate such discharges or to obtain its own permits in the future covering the discharges to its facilities (such as an NPDES permit).

Sometimes, proposed encroachments simply cannot be allowed. Pioneer defines “unreasonable and material interference” as anything impairing the conveyance of the preencroachment quantity of water, or substantially impairing Pioneer’s operation or maintenance activities, and the impairment cannot be mitigated through special conditions of approval (i.e., the adverse effects cannot readily be “engineered” around).

Reasonableness, cooperation, communication, and long-range planning are crucial when encroaching on irrigation facilities. So, too, is the understanding of applicants or prospective licensees that “no” means “no” for a reason. Again, the end goal of all involved should be the same, whether you are irrigating a quarter of an acre or 5,000 acres: delivering irrigation water as cost effectively, efficiently, and safely as possible. Provided no one loses sight of the common end goal, solutions oftentimes present themselves in a manner that everyone can live and work with.

Andrew J. Waldera practices in the areas of water, land use, environmental, natural resources, and agricultural law at Sawtooth Law Offices in Boise, Idaho. You can reach him at andy@sawtoothlaw.com.

Irrigation Leader

ADVERTISEMENT

“IWS provided a debris management system for our project that met our expectations for equipment performance. They have been very responsive when handling issues during commissioning and are continuing to provide great service during the warranty period.”

- Alan W. Hansten P.E Manager North Side Energy Canal Co., Ltd. CONTACT RICH GARGAN (661) 979-1815 iwsrich@sbcglobal.net

CHRIS GARGAN (661) 979-7206 iwschris@sbcglobal.net

JOEL IRVING (310) 614-4681 iwsjoel@sbcglobal.net

International Water Screens 11007 Ainswick Dr. Bakersfield CA 93311 w: internationalwaterscreens.com Phone: (661)-746-7959

The Innovators

Letting the Product Speak for Itself:

36

Diamond Plastics Opens Up Its Manufacturing Plant to the Water Community

I

f a picture is worth a thousand words, then an open house is worth a set of encyclopedias.

This past March, Diamond Plastics opened the doors of its manufacturing plant in Grand Island, Nebraska, to more than 70 engineers and water managers from across the country to introduce them to the company’s latest expansion. While PVC has been produced through 48 inches for over a decade, the latest equipment in Diamond’s plant is capable of producing PVC pipe through 60-inch diameters in a variety of pressure- and nonpressurerated capabilities.

Diamond conducts plant tours in its seven plants on a regular basis, usually in smaller groups with less emphasis on design and installation training. This was Diamond’s first open house showcasing its 60-inch capabilities. The plant tour was a very small piece of the open house experience. In addition, guests were provided with over eight hours of training in the proper design and installation of PVC, with a focus on large diameters, as well as several opportunities to interact with peers and discuss similar experiences.

According to Dennis Bauer, Diamond’s vice president of sales and marketing, the open house was an effort “to provide a world-class educational experience for professionals involved in the selection and design of large-diameter pipe for water and sewer applications. We believed that an open house provided the optimum venue for bringing professionals together to discuss the latest technology in PVC manufacturing as well as the latest design and installation techniques.”

That meant providing participants with a solid training program over the two-day event. Topics included basic extrusion concepts, pressure pipe design, sewer pipe design, and large-diameter pipe installation. The instructors for these courses were some of the most highly respected names in the industry—Amster Howard, Ron Bishop, and Randal Dobbs, to name just a few.

Mr. Bauer stressed the importance of getting people into the plant and demonstrating manufacturing and quality control procedures.

“Many people involved in product selection and installation don’t have a good idea of what we do

to produce high-quality PVC pipe. By opening up the manufacturing process and test procedures, we help them understand that we are not doing anything by chance; we are adhering to exacting tolerances and standards.”

The quality control portion of the open house involved witnessing flattening and impact tests, dimensional checks, an each-piece hydrostatic test, an acetone immersion

Open house visitors viewing Diamond’s 60-inch pipe.

Irrigation Leader

examination, and a burst pressure test. The burst pressure test involved the application of 1,700 pounds per square inch of pressure to cause failure in a piece of DR18 pipe.

Mr. Bauer explained, “You put that piece of pipe into our in-ground test bunker and apply water and pressure until the pipe fails. We set up a camera that allowed us to watch it as it got closer and closer to failure. We actually ran two cameras, one from a vantage point inside the pit and the other on the test gauge. Right after the piece of pipe burst, the camera failed.”

Diamond wanted to familiarize people with its largediameter offerings. “Testing for large-diameter pipe is the same as testing for small-diameter pipe. The standard has been in place for a long time. The American Water Works

Association has the same kind of testing for all those sizes—from 4 inches on up to 60 inches.”

Over the years, Diamond has been able to increase the pressure capabilities of its pipes so it can now manufacture DR14 pipe rated 305 pounds per square inch in much larger diameters than in the past. “We are looking at going even higher; we keep getting better at what we do.

Our customers get the same performance they have come to expect from the smaller-diameter pipe in the largerdiameter pipe.”

For Diamond, bringing people together to discuss pipe was as important as seeing the behind-the-scenes activities of a major PVC pipe manufacturer. “We wanted an environment where peers could discuss the pipe issues they face on an ongoing basis and improve their understanding of how large-diameter PVC can be a reliable alternative.

Most of the attendees came away from the open house with more knowledge of how PVC is produced as well as recommendations for proper design and installation procedures.”

For more information about the open house or Diamond Plastics’ large-diameter PVC offerings, contact Dennis Bauer at DBauer@DPCpipe.com.

Training session.

Irrigation Leader

37

CLASSIFIED LISTINGS

The District offers an extremely competitive salary and full range of benefits. Resumes, along with a complete salary history must be submitted online or by mail to: btroxel@bak.rr.com or Western Employers Consultants, P.O. Box 2055, Bakersfield, CA 93303

e or

This position requires a minimum of five (5) years’ experience in a construction or civil engineering setting. A college degree in construction management, construction science, architecture, or civil engineering is required.

ay – Strathm s d

Since

1915

iga

i tion Distr

c

t

rr

I

Lindsay-Strathmore Irrigation District, located in the Central Valley of California, is in need of a candidate for the newly created position of Construction Manager. This position involves extensive construction activity to update the District’s distribution system and to rebuild the District’s infrastructure. The ideal candidate should possess a comprehensive construction background with strong managerial, planning, and budgeting skills. The Construction Manager will be responsible for establishing an engineering department to carry the District’s distribution plan into the future.

Lin

CONSTRUCTION MANAGER

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

ASSISTANT HYDROPOWER/PUMPING PLANT OPERATOR/DAMTENDER AND MAINTENANCE The Yakima-Tieton Irrigation District is seeking qualified applicants for the position of Assistant Hydro/Pumping Plant Operator/Damtender and Maintenance Crew. Duties and Responsibilities include the operation and maintenance of two hydropower plants, 6 pump stations, a dam and reservoir. The position also includes working on the general maintenance of the entire delivery system including the pressurized pipe and main canal. The position is represented by a collective bargaining unit organized under Laborers Local No. 348. This position is full time with benefits. Wage range is $21.43 to $22.27 per hour plus overtime. A training program will be provided as needed.

The Yakima-Tieton Irrigation District serves 28,000 acres through a pressurized pipe delivery system and is located west of the City of Yakima.

Submit resume to: Yakima-Tieton Irrigation District 470 Camp 4 Road, Yakima WA 98908 509-678-4101 Fax: 509-678-5730 Or e-mail to ytid@yvn.com Resumes accepted until August 31, 2016 at 5:00 p.m.

District web-site is www.yakimatietonirrigation.com 38

Irrigation Leader

ADVERTISEMENT

We Are Westlands

Family farming for more than 60 years

Sal Parra Sr. and Sal Parra Jr. Nothing speaks of summer better than sweet, delicious farm-grown watermelons. Sal Parra has been farming in Westlands Water District for more than 47 years. As a family farmer, he is pleased to work alongside the next generation of farmers, his son, Sal Parra, Jr. At Burford Ranch they grow some of the freshest produce that Central California growers provide to communities across the nation.

Growing more than $1 billion worth of food and fiber annually Supporting 50,000 people in communities dependent on Westlands’ agricultural economy Generating $3.5 billion in farm-related economic activities Producing 60 high-quality crops, including tomatoes, onions, melons, grapes and nuts Serving California, the United States and more than 150 countries around the world

559-224-1523

wwd.ca.gov

Bridging the gap between idea + achievement Offices worldwide

hdrinc.com

2016 CALENDAR

July 11–12 North Dakota Water Resources Districts, Joint Summer Meetings, Fargo, ND July 26–27 Kansas Water Congress, Summer Conference, Wichita, KS August 3–5 National Water Resources Association, Western Water Seminar, Sun Valley, ID August 23–25 Texas Alliance of Groundwater Districts, Groundwater Summit, San Marcos, TX August 24–26 Colorado Water Congress, Summer Conference and Membership Meeting, Steamboat Springs, CO October 12–14 Texas Water Conservation Association, Fall Meeting, San Antonio, TX October 26–28 WESTCAS, Fall Conference, Phoenix, AZ November 3 Columbia Basin Development League, Annual Conference, Moses Lake, WA November 3–4 Idaho Water Users Association, Water Law Seminar, Boise, ID November 14–16 National Water Resources Association, 85th Annual Conference, San Diego, CA November 20–22 Nebraska Water Resources Association & Nebraska State Irrigation Association, Joint Convention,

Kearney, NE November 29–December 2 Association of California Water Agencies, 2016 Fall Conference & Exhibition, Anaheim, CA November 30–December 2 Washington State Water Resources Association, Annual Conference, Spokane, WA February 18–25, 2017 New Zealand Water Leader Educational Tour, sponsored by Irrigation Leader and Municipal Water Leader magazines For more information on advertising in Irrigation Leader magazine, or if you would like to have 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.waterstrategies.com/irrigation-leader