Excerpt
CONGRESS commissioned the High Plains study “to assure an adequate supply of food to the nation and to promote the economic vitality of the High Plains region” (see JSWC, November-December 1982, pp. 310–314). Given the declining groundwater levels in the Ogallala Aquifer, the High Plains study was instead a study that ignored fundamental issues in order to serve more immediate, vested interests. These interests are best described by their allegiance to the irrigation imperative.
Beginning with a planning horizon of 43 years (1977–2020), the study engaged in a variety of exercises that accommodate conservation on the premise that the current use of the Ogallala Aquifer for irrigation is a preferred use. Comparing management strategies over a limited period tends to diminish the relative value of strategies that could assure perpetual use of the aquifer, for example, mandatory conservation. At the same time, such an approach masks the disastrous impact of any strategy, voluntary conservation, for example, that permits eventual exhaustion of the aquifer.
The High Plains study validates the assumption that irrigation in the High Plains is a national treasure to be protected at almost any cost. For the time being (over …
Footnotes
Marty Strange is co-director of the Center for Rural Affairs, Walthill, Nebraska 68067. This article is based on A Report on the High Plains Study, prepared by the Working Group on the Ogallala Aquifer, commissioned by the Missouri Basin Great Plains Caucus. The caucus is an informal association of private organizations concerned with protecting that region's human and natural resources. Strange co-chaired the working group on the Ogallala Aquifer. A single copy of its full report is available free from the Center for Rural Affairs.
- Copyright 1983 by the Soil and Water Conservation Society
This article requires a subscription to view the full text. If you have a subscription you may use the login form below to view the article. Access to this article can also be purchased.