Sorry state of the newspaper industry in Kansas

It simply amazes me every time I take anything more than a cursory glance at how things are going in the newspaper industry in the Sunflower State.  Amazed because I just didn't think it could get much worse.

Unfortunately, for those of us still in Kansas, Gatehouse Media seems to know just how to continue to lower the bar.

Sure, I've been seeing complaints on Facebook — a scourge in its own right — about The Salina Journal lately from residents of the Lindsborg community. It seems they've been having a nightmare of a time getting their paper, not just on time, but on the same day.

Posting after posting in this community turns to subscribers not getting their paper for the day, or in some cases, for several days.

Now, to be sure, some of these problems might fall to carriers, who are certainly paid a pittance. But that's as it's always been. Some carriers were good, some not.

However, and obviously I'm only watching as folks post comments about their particular situation, the Journal isn't helping them out much.

When subscribers call in, the response varies. No one answers on up to promises of a delivery that never comes.

Heck, I've seen postings from carriers that papers will be late, thanks to mechanical issues or some such problem. To be sure, having spent my years in the industry, I know things break. Way too often, in fact. But it's also a handy excuse.

But Salina has long had two printing presses and a multitude of problems just getting the paper out the door, never mind onto the subscribers' doorsteps. 

Now, however, Salina has gone the way of The Hays Daily News, in that its printing presses have been silenced, the printers shown the door and the task of printing the daily paper sent elsewhere. 

When the Hays presses were turned off, the paper was printed in Salina, often on the presses that came from Hays.

Now, of course, Salina and Hays are printed in Hutchinson.

Its a trend.

The Wichita Eagle is being printed in Kansas City, for example. There have been so many changes, I can't keep track of them all.

But the latest low to be struck by Gatehouse-Kansas, if I can use that moniker, is the absolute devastation of the staffing at all the Gatehouse papers, most notably the former Harris Enterprises newspaper, which included Hays, Salina, Garden City, Hutchinson and Ottawa in Kansas and Burlington in Iowa.

Gatehouse picked the group up for a song, reportedly $20 million. It had a long and deeply respected history.

The names are the same, but you can't recognize what it once was.

You see, it's the papers' skeletons that are still visible. Most still occupy the now vastly oversized buildings, considering how small staffs are.

Perusing staff listings online show a paltry reminder. The number of reporters who are working in four of the communities — Hays, Salina, Garden City and Hutchinson —now match the number of reporters we had at our peak at the Hays Daily News.

There are only six reporters shown as working at these four papers, two each at Hutchinson and Hays, and one each at Garden City and Salina. 

Salina is looking to hire a reporter, but I'm not about to suggest anyone apply. You would almost need to be magical to fit the job description. Consider:

The successful candidate, according to an advertisement, will have to cover the community news, as well as local government, as well as features. But you'll also need to cover "intense breaking news situations." No sweat, I did that for more than 30 years.

But now, you have to also post on social media, while writing "quickly under deadline pressure."

Reporting accurately is still a requirement, thankfully, but you also have to be an accomplished photographer and videographer. Well, you have to shoot "strong" photos and videos as well. 

And you must be available nights and weekends. I get that; the news doesn't schedule when it's going to happen.

But my former colleagues tell of working most days and evening, and most weekends. Sort of slave labor in some respects.

You only need some experience, at a college paper or someplace else, and be working toward a bachelor's degree.

They claim to have a competitive wage, benefits and offer time off. They don't elaborate.

But the kicker here is, if you want to apply, you send your resume to Topeka. Not Salina. They don't have a managing editor or an executive editor, and from the staff listing, no publisher, well, other than one in Topeka, who serves as publisher there and for other Gatehouse papers across the state. They do now have a general manager, one shared by Hutchinson and Hays. More cheapskateism, if you'll excuse the word.

It's also notable that Salina's staff roster lists five people in the newsroom, one of whom has already left the paper. All told there are 17 people on the Journal roster, down from perhaps more than 100 who worked there at its peak.

Garden City shows six people on their roster. Hutchinson has 20.

Hays has 11. At its peak, Hays had nearly double that in the newsroom alone. The paper overall had more than 65 employees.

I was fortunate enough to leave The HDN when it was still fairly vibrant, even though Harris shareholders had already turned their backs on the business.

In hindsight, I now look like the smartest guy around, taking my retirement months before the axe would have fallen.

I don't regret it at all.

Moving at the speed of water

There's plenty happening these days on the water front in Kansas.

That's no different than it typically is, however. It just seems there's a different perspective abounding. It's not a new one, that's for sure, but different from what I'd call normal.

You see, water policy in Kansas moves at a speed snails would be proud of. In short, it doesn't move much.

I can remember sitting in a Kansas Water Office river advisory committee meeting during what was considered a heyday in monumental water change while I was at The Hays Daily News. Well,  I should say it was a multi-year continuation of a heyday in monumental water change.

You see, I was sitting in this meeting, years after the Kansas Water Office created the river basin advisory committees, listening as someone talked about action needed to be taken to set the state on a course of water sufficiency.

I sat there, knowing that I had heard this exact message before, in an earlier meeting of the same committee. There's an old adage in the newspaper industry that there's only so many ways to write the same story over and over.

So I decided I couldn't write the same thing again, opting instead to stop attending the redundant basin advisory meetings, where advice wasn't often offered and even more rarely accepted by state powers-to-be.

It was a wise move on my part, as when I went back to those meetings — again years later — only to find they were still discussing the same things, the same solutions. Heck, even the same people were on the committees.

Why, you ask, am I dredging all of this up, when it was years ago, and likely years in the future.

Well, I chuckled a bit (or a lot) when I saw Hays city officials were agog that it had taken so long for the state's Division of Water Resources to get off the dime on Hays' plan to tap water along the Arkansas River outside Kinsley on land Hays bought long ago for the sole purpose of farming its water.

It's been a whopping four years, commissioners bemoaned of the state's inaction. And they weren't going to stand for it, heading to Topeka to lobby the governor, her lieutenant and state Sen. Rick Billinger, R-Goodland, on convincing DWR to get moving. It seems Billinger was most anxious to pressure DWR and its Chief Engineer David Barfield, but keep in mind Hays is the largest contingent of voters in Billinger's district.

But two things are at work here, and one taints the system.

First, as I've already laid out, water policy or action in Kansas moves slow.

Second, it was wrong for Hays to head to the governor or Billinger, and especially bad they suggested they might intervene.

You see, Barfield is supposed to be a protected employee, one protected — insulated — from political pressure.

And it seems like these folks just don't get that. But that's been another in a long, slow-moving effort by — you guessed it — politicians, who want to inject politics into an issue that is already difficult enough. They want to strip Barfield of that protection.

To be sure, it's fair enough for Hays to lobby DWR to get its act in gear, although they knew it was going to be a long, long time before water started flowing from Kinsley to Hays. They chose to ignore it and they should recognize that. Hays sat on the ranch water for years before even starting the task of asking for permission to build a pipeline.

I long said it would take 10 years before a drop of water headed north, even if there's not a lawsuit filed to stop it. They pooh-poohed me. But that's always been Hays' style: When they want something, they want it now. Perhaps not a bad approach for some things, but this is not one-size-fits-all situation.

The transfer of water from the R9 Ranch in Edwards County to the Schoenchen wellfield in southern Ellis County is groundbreaking, the first time the state's water-transfer act has been triggered. Plus, the request from Hays for taking an irrigation water right and turning it into a municipal water right is significant, given its so much bigger than is typically seen. It's setting precedence as well, and is something that will happen again and again as temperatures warm and pressure comes to bear on water resources here and afar, and cities flush with cash start buying up water rights. Heck, irrigators in southwest Kansas already want to avoid responsibility to save water and import it in from the Missouri River. It's still being quietly considered, never mind the huge cost

So, we have two precedent-setting situations before us.

These tasks need to be done right, and by that I mean ethically and legally.

I'm confident there will be a lawsuit, if not several, and the deep-pocketed folks behind it will press it as far as they can, likely to the Kansas Supreme Court, perhaps beyond. Activity in the halls of justice move only slightly faster than water policy.

That's why it's important for political pressure to look elsewhere. Legislators have plenty else to do, fixing problems facing Kansas. State officials have plenty else to do, given the finance problems Kansas continues to face.

I'm also confident city folks have plenty else to do. If they don't think so, perhaps they need to take a closer look at their city. There's always plenty of work left to do.

And let's face it, DWR has plenty of other work to do, in addition to the routine work it's charged to do with a reduced staff that came about when Republicans decided to destroy the state budget.

Something's gotta give when workload increases and the number of people there to do the job doesn't keep pace. Throw in unneeded interference and the task slows down even more.

Take this LEMA and shove it

After sitting in something of a state of limbo for the past 45 days, directors of the St. John-based Big Bend Groundwater Management District No. 5 voted to embrace a self-developed plan aimed at restoring water to the nearby Quivira National Wildlife Refuge.

The directors took their action despite a warning from the state's water czar that the plan simply doesn't go far enough in reducing the demand on the imperiled Rattlesnake Creek that supplies Quivira — and its hundreds of thousands of birds, many of them endangered.

In short, the GMD board essentially told David Barfield, chief engineer of the Division of Water Resources, to take their LEMA and shove it. Again, never mind that Barfield said the plan doesn't go far enough.

Heck, even lame duck Kansas Agriculture Secretary Jackie McClaskey quietly rushed out a letter in October telling the board to sit back and relax before doing anything hasty. The board didn't wait long, however.

Of course, you could tell the pressure was mounting to do something.

Letters from cities, school districts and ag-related entities were flowing in to the GMD, likely at their urging, telling Barfield and his DWR, along with the U.S. Fish and Widllife Service, which operates Quivira, to move ahead with the plan before them. Heck, letters were even sent to state political leaders and ethics-ravaged and soon-to-be former Interior Secretary Ryan Zinke.

The LEMA proposed by GMD 5 first saw the light of day in August, sticking with its long-held proposal to require the removal of end guns from center pivots. That might save about 14,000 acre feet of water, they said.

They also proposed to reduce water use by about 4,000 acre feet in an area that has greatest effect on streamflow in the Rattlesnake.

Where that savings would come from, however, is anybody's guess. But the board hopes to find it somehow.

The biggest share of the "recovery" of Quivira water will come from augmentation — the drilling and pumping of yet additional wells for delivery of water from a proposed wellfield somewhere south of the refuge and then delivered to Rattlesnake Creek.

Exactly where this wellfield will go is still up in the air, however.

"The end gun program is not expected to fully reverse trends or to provide a complete offset of future streamflow losses; thus, the augmentation wells will serve to deliver flow sufficient to meet the objective for serviceable supply on this reach of Rattlesnake Creek," the LEMA plan states.

Now, the plan won't take effect until 2020, more than a year out. And the plan will only be evaluated twice in the first 10 years. It will exist in five-year terms.

What will all this mean for Barfield?

Last we left it, Barfield had dictated that additional reductions were needed, and his agency said there was a difference of about 10,000 acre feet. GMD 5 didn't like that idea at all, and that's when McClaskey wrote the letter essentially saying don't give up hope yet.

Of course, it's a little hard to tell where DWR is now, given they are slow to post information and don't provide much detail when they do. It's also tough to say if McClaskey pressured Barfield to back off.

Suffice it to say up front that Barfield can't change anything in the LEMA plan. He might be able to buy some time, but if the GMD wants to move ahead, he will have to set hearings. 

The law isn't a very good one, in that his hands are tied. Basically, he has to find some fault with it to reject it. Easy enough, of course, but, he can only reject it or accept it.

If it's rejected, he can make recommendations. If it's accepted, well, it likely will be going to court, especially considering it's already there on the most basic of reasons.

Suffice it to say it's another shining example that irrigators aren't at all willing to cut back. Despite all the talk about saving water, it hasn't happened. It likely won't until legislators force it.

Here, irrigators will lose end guns, but they never should have had them in the first place. They are truly wasting water, a violation of state law.

So, they don't want to do anything to reduce water use. In fact, they've already suggested some changes that will allow flexibility.

Next up will be to see how Barfield and his DWR crew responds.

This is gonna get ugly. It should.

Of politics and Kansas

Blessed are the Kansans who found it in their hearts to vote against the state's racist-in-chief Kris Kobach.

He was an evil man who would have been, well, entirely wrong for Kansas, which, despite all its shortcomings, is essentially a state filled with well-intentioned, albeit often misguided folks.

Why Kansas is a state with so many Republicans, or for that matter Democrats, is a mystery. Instead, I would think Kansas residents would be clamoring to register as independent voters, the parties be damned.

I say that because Kansas has been left behind by them both, and you can throw any minor-league parties into that mix. Bottom line, Kansas is and always has been a state that wants to do its own thing, often screwing it up, but trying just the same.

In some respects, I think the vast majority of Kansans are so anti-political that they really don't care who serves as governor or secretary of state or someone in the Legislature, that they'd rather leave the task of choosing the select few to someone else or another day. Same goes for those pesky politicians in Washington who have disappointed Kansans for so many years.

But there has been a change of late. And yes, I'm referring to the political shenanigans of Trump and his party of ill-repute — the Republicans. For Kansas, that includes the likes of Pat Roberts and Jerry Moran, long level-headed men who kind of meant to do the right things, didn't stir up too much trouble and were willing to step across the aisle and talk to people of the (gasp) other party.

Moran has long groaned about the abuses and wrongs that have been taking place in D.C., but has fully accepted and adopted the shenanigans, putting party above all else — especially Kansas and its residents. Roberts has gone with the flow so long, it was a change barely discernible.

They both disgust me, to say the least.

For some reason, it all seemed to change when the tea party folks, and Tim Huelkamp, stepped to the forefront, and katie-bar-the-door, everyone wanted to be outfront. Typically, that's a dangerous spot to be, due to the fallout that follows. But foolish minds never worry about the consequences.

Back in Kansas, the same trend was falling in place, with the party powerful — whoever that might be at the moment — was pushing trends and people who only had an agenda that failed to include Kansas. Instead, the quest was prosperity for those who bankrolled the situation, their friends and relatives and the power brokers who hid behind closed doors.

Read Sam Brownback into that equation, a political hack all the way back to his college days when he alienated his classmates. Sam seems to be a guerilla partisan, striking and then slipping into the woodwork, either to lick his wounds or let people forget. But he re-emerges, just as he did as state Ag Secretary, where he performed adequately and got his name out. Then he tried Congress before heading back home to destroy Kansas, by running for governor.

We all know how that turned out, with Kansas kicked in the teeth over and over, schools closing, and the list goes on. Jeff Colyer appears to have been the patsy in this event and will likely just go away.

But look at the debris and destruction old Sam left behind: An emboldened Kris Kobach, whose sole goal it seems was white supremacy, armed no less. He sought to strip voting rights, and expand gun rights.

His party of ill-repute went right on along with it, tossing a smattering of money his way to keep him in the game. They should have called him out for all his shenanigans.

Thankfully, Kansas voters saw through his ploy and said no, although entirely too many people approved of him. I'm not sure what that says of them, however.

But voters in the Sunflower state stuck with those who had been serving in the U.S. House of Representatives, except in one case. For that, I'm pleased.

However, and that's a big one, voters who were smart enough to reject Kobach were foolish enough to return Roger Marshall, Ron Estes and some new person that honestly I'm just not familiar with, but who leaves me with a really bad taste in my mouth.

I recognize I'm now branded a liberal, although I had always considered myself more middle-of-the-road on politics than left-wing. Considering the religious right we now have in power, I guess I am liberal, so take that all into account.

But Marshall is solidly Republican, never mind Kansas, and only favors the rich and famous or those knighted by his king, Donald Trump. Estes reminds me of the guy who wants to be everyone's friend, but doesn't have a clue what's really happening in the first place. He just keeps smiling, who gives a damn about the devastation surrounding him.

So what's all this mean?

Kansas is better than this. The state and its inhabitants know right from wrong and actually do care about their fellow man, whether they are black, brown, yellow or white. It's time we all step up and take charge of this state, deciding who can represent us and what they can do. It is, after all, our future.

We must decide where Kansas has been, and where we are going. And we must do it quick.

Weather a mishmash

If you listened only to the drama-bound television weathermen and women, you'd think Kansas has never seen snow in October.

NEVER.

Or wait for it, the world might come to an end when temperatures fall below freezing, like they have the last two days. Yes, two days, never mind the forecasters pronouncements Monday night that (gasp), the thermometer might fall below freezing during the early morning hours Tuesday.

They did, of course, but they also feel below freezing on Monday morning as well, in both Hays and Salina.

Of course, television, in many respects, never let the facts stand in the way of a good boost.
And no, I am not espousing the views of the dictator Donald Trump, who likes to talk about fake news.

If the facts follow along with the great story, then all's fine, but there has to be that drama. That's why, when the National Weather Service, in its usual measured system of delivery, said there was a freeze warning Tuesday morning. There was. It froze.

But temperatures dropped below freezing Monday morning as well in Hays and Salina.

In essence, we got a two-fer.

I for one know temperatures fell below freezing on Monday morning. All I had to do was look at my poor tomato plants, which i had pulled up Sunday in the dreary drizzle, but the greenery left behind was much worse for the wear after the freeze. My pots of basil also took it in the shorts, and were left with a rather unhealthy black look.

But OMG, KWCH meteorologist Ross Jensen was agog that Salina might freeze Tuesday morning. It already had, of course.

And, OMG, it might snow. It did, a couple inches.

No biggie, other than to Ross, who long has worried in great detail about those poor trash cans being toppled in the Kansas wind. Not like we don't have much, you know.

It used to be TV meteorologists details the weather in calming voices. Not heralding "weather alerts" everytime the wind blew, or lightning struck, or storms were possible, or when the heat rose or the cold fell.

It's simply too much. I sometimes think I could do a better job telling folks what the weather might be, at least in a calm manner.

Of course, I'd have to rely on the real experts at the National Weather Service, which is where I get my information.

Season's changing

Yep, there's no doubt the season is changing. You can see it on any thermometer, or in nature.

I've been blessed of late to watch and marvel as hummingbirds have decided to take over the yard, and sip nectar (the homemade kind) from feeders now hanging from three locations in the backyard and one in the front yard — a move that you'll soon understand.

I've had a spare hook out back that I hoped would someday be a spot to attract hummingbirds. I guess through wishful hoping, I decided to leave up a couple hummingbird feeders even though they were empty. Well, except for the rain that fell into the holes where the birds fit their beak for a sip of sweet sugar-and-water.

As I was looking out the back window one day a few weeks ago as I prepared for a bite to eat, I spotted what I was confident to be a lone hummingbird.

Ah, the joy, as I've never had the tiny birds flying about. Yes, I've put up hummingbird feeders before, but it apparently was a test run to make sure I knew the correct recipe for sugar water. I did, but they didn't come around.

So, this year, I was completely unprepared.

The hummingbird took a close look at both the feeders hanging, but turned up its nose — so to speak — and went elsewhere. I soon found out why, as when I went to fill it with the good stuff, it had a mucky, semi-solid mix in the base. I'm sure it was some moldy crap that languished in the sun after each rain.

A quick dip in the sink and a thorough scrubbing got rid of the gunk.

But then nothing. I feared I had missed my chance. And I was damn mad.

Still, I headed back out for the other feeder, washed it down as well and filled it up. So now I had two unused feeders. No, I wasn't twice as mad, but I was twice as frustrated.

Until the next day. Then hallelujah, a hummer took the bait and sipped from my feeder. Frequently.

She, as I ultimately decided until I decided I was likely very wrong, soon became a frequent visitor to my yard. But as she (or he) visited more often, I noticed other movements.

It wasn't until my little hummer decided to abandon the tree at the back of the yard and set a spell on a little perch I've had hanging for nigh on to two years that I realized what the heck was happening.

She (or he) was ready to defend her (or his) turf. And she would sit on her throne not 10 feet from the house, and not more than 8 feet from the chair I sit in whilst outside. Oh sure, she (or he) would fly away when I walked out the door, but soon returned.

She (or he) didn't mind me or the dogs joining her morning or afternoon, provided we weren't too anxious to move about. Lazy dogs and a lazy me went right along with the idea.

But my little companion was anything but lazy. She (or he) was quick to defend the feeders, running off other hummers and even pondering putting up her dukes to defend against the horde of sparrows that sometimes frequented the yard. She (or he) always thought better of it, and returned to her (or his) throne.

At the peak, she (or he) was busy running off up to six would-be feeder robbers. Oh sure, they'd sneak in under cover of a feeder, or while the queen (or king) was busy chasing someone else off, and get a sip of sugar water. But it had to be quick.

That's when I decided, the hanger out at the back of the yard should go out front, along with a feeder.

The queen was none too happy. She (or he) had lost a valuable kingdom and, worked even harder to keep others away.

The beauty of it all was the feeder out front became the domain of another hummer, and apparently didn't have to fight off invading crusaders. Plus, I could watch both, depending on where I was.

To say I missed the chance to grab a few photos would be a massive mistake. I grabbed hundreds likely. And video. On my phone, on my cameras. Some good, some really sucked. I photographed so much thin air or unoccupied feeders, you'd have to laugh.

They are really — as in really, really — fast and if you aren't at the ready all the time, well forget it. I don't know how many times I'd reach for my camera or phone and poof, no bird.  Even when I saw a slow intruder, the queen (or king) was there like magic and they both were gone by the time my eye looked through the viewfinder.

I worried they'd all be gone when the cold front of last week swept through, but I was kind of wrong. The throngs did leave, but one out front and as many as two out back stuck around.

They're still a joy, but not so active. There's hardly anyone to bully out back and the one out front enjoys his (or her) sugar water.

Me, I keep an eye out. I'm sure their time here is limited. Another cool front is poised to hit and likely they'll head south.

I'll miss them, of course. But it was fun.

For an old guy like me, it was nice playing with these feisty little guys (or girls). I'm just hoping for a repeat next year. I'll be better prepared, or so I hope.

...

As a little footnote on another critter, a paltry few snails continued to migrate somewhere. What's left now, I presume are no longer functioning — as in dead. Interesting of course, but I still wish I knew what they heck species they are.  I'll figure it out someday.

More changes coming in plan to boost water for Quivira

ST. JOHN — The second draft of a plan designed to make Quivira National Wildlife Refuge’s senior water right whole again remains subject to revision, including actually reducing the size of the LEMA being proposed.
That revision should be forthcoming soon, Groundwater Management District No. 5 executive Director Orrin Feril told a standing room only crowd in St. John on Monday.
Reducing the size of the area included in the management area, part of a plan to fill the shortfall in a water impairment case involving the nearby wildlife refuge, would quell some complaints about areas in the GMD with little to no effect on water flow in the Rattlesnake Creek basin and consequently Quivira. But it’s sure to raise other concerns depending on how much proposed “voluntary” cuts will be needed on the area remaining to reduce what are essentially mandatory reductions in the amount of water being used.

A dry creekbed greeted visitors in this photo from Quivira National Wildlife Refuge.

Also Monday, the Division of Water Resources again dismissed an attempt by Audubon of Kansas to get the state and GMD to move more quickly on taking actions that would mean more water for Quivira, a popular stopping off point for many endangered species, including the iconic whooping crane.
Randy Rathbun, the attorney for AOK, 10 days ago sent a letter to DWR Chief Engineer David Barfield detailing the need to make sure Quivira can fulfil its water right. He also said failure to take action could result in the filing of a lawsuit seeking to force the state and U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, which owns the refuge, to take action.
Rathbun said the Kansas Water Appropriation Act requires the chief engineer to protect senior water rights, such as Quivira’s. Barfield’s two-year-old impairment report found that water rights junior to Quivira were preventing the refuge from obtaining its full water appropriation by as much as 3,000 to 5,000 acre feet each year.
In DWR’s response, agency attorney Kenneth B. Titus said the state had failed to post on its website a copy of the request to secure water filed by the federal wildlife agency. That document was filed along with the response.
But Titus noted the request was filed according state regulation that states: “If the area of complaint is located within the boundaries of a GMD and if the final report determines that the impairment is substantially due to direct interference, the chief engineer shall allow the GMD board to recommend how to regulate the impairing water rights to satisfy the impaired right.”
The GMD 5 board agreed to move forward with a LEMA, “and they are working diligently towards the formation of such a district.”
However, one lawsuit is already in the works, filed by several irrigators who object to the LEMA proposal. An attempt by the state to scuttle the lawsuit failed when a judge allowed it to move ahead.
Work on the LEMA has been underway since the impairment report, and has now been revised twice.
In the meantime, junior water rights have not been restricted, and likely won’t be until the plan takes effect, tentatively set for 2020.
So far, the only concrete reductions that have been discussed is a requirement for end guns — the large overhead water sprinklers at the end of a center pivot — must be removed by Jan. 1. There are approximately 1,300 end guns that will need to be removed.
In the latest draft of the LEMA, Feril said Monday, the board has sought to implement “voluntary” reductions that are based on water right priorities. Vested water rights, those in place when the state’s water appropriation laws were passed in 1945, won’t have any restrictions because they are senior to all other rights.
Another change in the latest revision is that reductions will be based on amounts allowed in water rights, rather than based on historic water use.
All told, there are water rights in the LEMA area amounting to 303,598 acre feet — or about 99 billion gallons annually.
Computer models suggest actual future water use without restrictions would be closer to 233,000 acre feet, about 76 billion gallons.
The state’s water agency, however, is saying the LEMA’s water use would need to be 210,000 acre feet — 68.5 billion gallons — five years after the LEMA is in place.
With the 19,000 acre feet expected to be saved with the removal of the end guns, that means another 4,000 acre feet of water use will have to be cut.
That’s where the so-called voluntary reductions will need to be made, and the savings will come from less than half of the GMD, depending on the revisions Feril said were possible.
At Monday’s meeting, Feril frequently talked about a schedule of cuts based on priority of water rights.
He also said that if cuts don’t reach the 210,000 acre-feet threshold required by DWR, those irrigators who met the required reductions would continue on as they have.
Irrigators who do not reduce water use by the amount needed would see the reductions become mandatory rather than voluntary.
The GMD’s accounting scenario envisions reductions of 25 percent to 45 percent, with the greatest cuts coming from the most junior water right holders.
In addition to the cuts, the plan to restore Quivira’s water right involves augmentation, the pumping of water from an area south of the refuge and the pipeline delivery when and where refuge staff wants it.
The water would come from a battery of wells that have not been drilled, and a specific location hasn’t been selected.
Feril said the GMD is working on getting an agreement with the state that will set out how much water can be used and where it will be delivered. That agreement has not been reached.
He’s uncertain when the agreement will be reached.

------
Any publications wanting to use this story should contact me directly.
As a full disclosure, I served on the board of Audubon of Kansas but have since stepped down from that position.