 |
MERRITT CROSSROADSdeaddrift report |
|
|
In an effort to divest itself of public programs, the US Bureau of Reclamation is considering a request for transfer of title of the publicly funded irrigation project in North-central Nebraska to the privately owned Ainsworth Irrigation District. We believe this transfer would jeopardize these public resources by removing federal oversight as well as public input regarding water conditions supplying Merritt Reservoir, the Snake River, and Niobrara River. Public hearings have demonstrated widespread opposition to such transfer and support for a complete environmental impact study of such a move. BACKGROUND OF TITLE TRANSFER ISSUEView documents from the NGPC and Ainsworth Irrigation Authority (PDF) format
What does fishing contribute to Nebraska's economy?
|
Merritt Reservoir Update Part One Jan. 21, 2005The proposed Transfer of Title of Merritt reservoir (and lands surrounding) from the Bureau of Reclamation to the Ainsworth Irrigation District (AID) is at a crossroads. All the questions from the initial scoping meetings to the recent referendum by the voters of Cherry County to reject the proposed transfer( by 91% ) suggest strongly that the answers have been unacceptable or remain unanswered.
The Cherry County Commissioners voted against the transfer. Now, the PR from AID is that, "...the district is pursuing widespread local and state support for the potential transfer." http://www.gop.gov/committeecentral/bills/hr5016.asp Well, gentle readers, that "widespread" support ain't gonna happen. Ain't gonna happen. It ain't happening now. A 91% vote of Cherry County residents just ain't quite "widespread". The local folk have researched this issue thoroughly and arguments against the giving away a valuable national resource to a private entity with a less than stellar track record of public relations with the local community isn't going to change. Now those votes count in the country I live in… Others agree with me. This quote from a cherry county resident, "The Bureau should be reminded of the supposed impossibility of title of transfer going forward when it is opposed by the lowest form of local government, i.e. Cherry County's commissioners. We didn't fight to get 91% opposition at the polls for exercise. Either we believe in voting or we don't, and the rules apply or they don't." Now 91% of the vote is a mandate. Look it up. A basic component of the parameters of the exchange from the bureau were citizen consensus. That consensus has spoken loud and clear enough for even deaf politicians to hear, for those who work in government agencies to hear, for those who represent us in Washington who have the final blessing on yes or no to the transfer to hear clearly that the transfer is opposed by the local residents and fishing and sporting groups across the state. The Bureau of Reclamation is at a crossroads in their considerations to transfer title to AID. The recent vote against transfer is only one of the issues that need to be addressed by the Bureau as this process sails merrily down the river… H.R. 5016 extends the water service contract for the Ainsworth Unit, Sandhills Division, Pick-Sloan Missouri basin program, Nebraska. The Ainsworth district receives its water from the Merritt dam and reservoir on the Snake River in Nebraska to provide a full-service irrigation supply to nearly 34,500 acres of land in north-central Nebraska. In a November 2002 letter to the bureau of reclamation, the district indicated its decision to request transfer of the Ainsworth project facilities from federal ownership to the district. The water contract for the district will expire on December 31, 2006. "To allow the district time to prepare and complete the terms of a management agreement, finalize the environmental analysis and develop legislation for the transfer, the district is requesting a four-year extension of its existing water contract. The contract extension would allow for continued water service during the title transfer process under current terms and conditions." http://www.gop.gov/committeecentral/bills/hr5016.asp Now all the above sounds so good, so far, but Congress helped AID out and bent over backwards because AID has failed at many levels to move this doomed process along. The environmental assessment handed in to the bureau was "awful", okay, just trust me. Or ask the bureau why it is completely redoing the whole assessment. Now why is that? The people teaming up with AID to formulate a hydropower plant on Merritt were the authors of the environmental assessment. AID's choice to represent them was a poor choice. Now wonder who is going to pay for all this nonsense? AID paid through the nose for this assessment and paid for a document that needed rewriting and correcting by the bureau staff. Poor judgment on that call. A lot of money was borrowed by AID. How do we trust information provided by AID in the past? Or information forthcoming? Who is gonna pay the bureau staff time to create a document that is supposed to be created by AID, And then the bureau is supposed to assess their own "assessment"? Naw, logic fails here and honest government. The bureau should bill AID for this work, and if not, why not? Anyone from the bureau willing to answer a few questions about this assessment? Contact me and we will display your comments. So far, everyone at the bureau contacted by us in the past was helpful and informative. We have more questions… National Environmental Policy Act says, "The center piece of NEPA is the environmental impact statement (EIS). The primary purpose of EIS is to serve as an action-forcing device to insure that the policies and goals defined in NEPA are incorporated into the ongoing programs and actions of the federal government. It must provide full and fair discussion of significant environmental impacts and inform decisions makers and the public of the reasonable alternatives, which would void or minimize adverse impact or enhance the quality of the human environment." Section I. National environmental policy act (NEPA.), 42 u.s.c. section 4321 et seq. Nebraska game and parks wants an EIS before transfer could be discussed further. Nebraska trout unlimited insists on an EIS. deaddrifters know that an EIS is the last thing the AID want or the bureau wants. They want a "done deal". The bureau is mandated to get it done, they want it done, just didn't count on such opposition on so many fronts. With the EA mired in the mud and distrusted, tainted rehash of poor "assessing", the only answer is immediately conduct an EIS. And maybe this time the guidelines set by the national environmental policy act will be followed, "Either the agency of a contractor may prepare an EIS. However, if a contractor may prepare the EIS, the contractor must be chosen by the agency and must execute a disclosure statement prepared by the lead agency, specifying that the contractor has no financial or other interest in the outcome of the project." Believe it when I see it… There are numerous financial issues for AID to work on like who pays for the environmental studies, the purchase of facilities with borrowed money, etc.? These are questions we have been asking from the beginning of this debate. "…the district is working with nearby counties, the Nebraska game and parks commission, other Nebraska state agencies, and state legislators to develop a management agreement. An executed management agreement will serve as a major part in an environmental analysis required under the national environmental policy act. The analysis must be completed prior to this transfer of ownership." Well, is there a conservation and management plan in the works with the NGPC? Without it the EA is incomplete. The bureau is requesting other agencies to review the EA when the corrections are completed. Who are the agencies? When will the review take place? Who will be the entity that will "review"? An adequate EIS must contain the following:
So, The bureau is at the crossroads. Which way to go now? I think they should do the right thing, leave things as they are. Don't do anything. Now that isn't so difficult is it? For a government agency probably impossible. For more info on the Merritt reservoir situation Check out www.deaddrift.com Contact us at [email protected] Later, Kenneth d. Bay, managing editor, deaddrift.com |
|