The water curtailment that could have dried up 500,000 acres in eastern and south-central Idaho this summer has been avoided with a temporary compromise between senior surface water users and junior groundwater users.

Water users were charged with finding a long-term solution by Oct.1.

Groundwater users could have had safe harbor from the curtailment if they complied with a 2015 mitigation agreement. But there were disagreements over the terms of that agreement and orders from the Idaho Department of Water Resources that groundwater district would have to reduce consumptive use even more to stabilize the Eastern Snake Plain Aquifer.

“Many of the groundwater districts felt that they couldn’t comply… they said we’re not operating under that 2015 agreement anymore,” said Paul Arrington, executive director of Idaho Water Users Association.

“It does feel tense right now … there’s a lot of emotion in the room,” he said.

Aquifer decline

Putting aside the stress and the anxiety of the moment, he thinks there are some things that everybody agrees on.

“One, we need to do something to stop the decline in the aquifer. We need to do something. And two, we need to do something that protects the economies and communities of Idaho,” he said.

In a situation that’s as emotionally charged as this, it’s easy to point to the other side and say “well they just want to run me out of business or they don’t care or they’re this dirty bugger or that dirty bugger,” he said.

“But at the end of the day, we’re all farmers. We all are working together. We all want to protect the economies and communities of Idaho,” he said.

Difficult conversations

But there are some difficult challenges and conversations ahead. One of the difficult conversations is whether efforts should be to level out the aquifer or raise the level and if so, to what point, he said.

“Those kinds of decisions really shape what needs to be done and how much needs to be done,” he said.

Other questions include how much reduction in groundwater pumping is needed, how should the obligations under that new settlement agreement be allocated and how will the obligations be monitored and enforced.

“These are some challenging conversations that folks are having and are going to have over the next few years,” he said.

In his view, water users are at a pivot point.

“Curtailment is disruptive, it’s a disruptive solution that can have … devastating impacts, but it’s the law in Idaho,” he said.

Prior appropriation

If water users ask the state to solve the problem, there are going to be curtailments because the law says prior appropriation — first in time, first in right.

“It’s on the water users to come together to find solutions that will allow our economies and communities to continue to thrive while we protect our water resources,” he said.

Idaho can learn from other western states and perhaps the greatest lesson to learn is that agriculture must work together.

“We cannot divide ourselves in water challenges because history has shown in these other states that when we are divided, ag loses in the long run,” he said.