There is just one race for the Upper Republican Natural Resources District (NRD) board of directors in the general election.
    Voters will have two candidates before them on Nov. 6, both seeking the at-large position on the NRD board. All voters in the Upper Republican NRD that includes Chase, Perkins and Dundy Counties will choose between these two candidates.
    The candidates answered a series of questions posed to them by news staff at this newspaper.
1. By 2020, the URNRD will have nearly 10,000 idled irrigated acres coming out of the CREP program. If pumping resumes on these acres, it could make compact compliance more difficult and cause more reliance on stream augmentation. What options do you consider viable for these acres?
    Dinnel: Owners of CREP contracts are being offered the opportunity to re-enroll these acres at higher rates when their contracts expire. Several 10-year contracts have already been re-enrolled. I anticipate that more will re-enroll in 2020. The URNRD is looking at options offering buyouts of these CREP acres for permanent retirement. They currently have grant funds available for this. I favor the option of encouraging contract holders to re-enroll and then offering them an upfront buyout to retire those acres at the end of the new contract (10 or 15 years). This would allow the URNRD to retire more acres for less money.
    Stromberger: I support the CREP program and feel those acres should be re-enrolled in the program or a similar program needs to be created for those acres. CREP has helped with water conservation, stream flow and wildlife habitat.
    2. When the current five-year, 65-inch allocation ends, do you support maintaining that level or reducing it? Why?
    Stromberger: I support maintaining the current allocation.  The URNRD has been a leader in regulating water usage and it’s working. Moisture probes, crop rotation and improved irrigation systems have also helped stabilize the aquifer.  The economy of our area depends solely on agriculture and lowering the allocation would be detrimental.
    Dinnel: There are four years remaining on the current allocation period. I believe that it is important to use that time to study what impact the allocation has had on the groundwater level and on the economy in the past. This will give us a tool to better determine what is most beneficial to our district presently and in the future. With current and developing irrigation technology as well as crop genetics, there is a strong probability that allocations could be reduced without harming the economy and at the same time preserving our water resources for the future of our community.
    3. What actions or programs should the URNRD be implementing to ensure sustainability of the aquifer?
    Dinnel: I believe that there should be more discussions with the producers themselves as to what they think would be beneficial, versus a top down approach. Working with the producers and the businesses that support the agricultural economy of our region is imperative to the success of maintaining and sustaining the aquifer. The South Platte flood water project that has been analyzed by the Bureau of Reclamation in the past is something that needs more intense study as a viable possibility to recharge the aquifer. Working with the University of Nebraska and other institutions that have conducted studies on crop water requirements and irrigation timing can help us to develop a plan that will not only aid in preserving the aquifer, but will increase profitability for our producers. While the one-size- fits-all allocation may seem to be the “fairest” approach, the fact is that the remaining aquifer is not the same in all areas of the district. Looking at different approaches to solutions for specific areas of the district where aquifer sustainability is in serious doubt is needed.

To read the full story, subscribe to the e-edition online or call the Breeze at 308-394-5389 to subscribe to the print edition.