Anyone Following This In Idaho

notdonhunting · Friday at 7:12 PM

It is starting to look like no state is going survive the evil corruption.
There is alot more to this story than this clip gives you.

https://twitter.com/x/status/1804124590727430232

Stillwater165 · Friday at 7:39 PM

Sad state of affairs ! I’ve got family over there dealing with that mess. Most of today’s society doesn’t care …… as long as the shelves are full at the grocery store ! It’s not gettin any better……anywhere !

yoteduster · Friday at 8:34 PM

This is scary stuff

appaloosa · Friday at 8:36 PM

Well they can shut it off now, or keep depleting the aquifer until it is gone? What would you suggest they do?

grizzly · Friday at 10:21 PM

appaloosa said:
Well they can shut it off now, or keep depleting the aquifer until it is gone? What would you suggest they do?

What's the other side of the story?

Junior water rights? No water rights?

I've dealt with the purchase of water in Idaho, so I'm somewhat familiar with that side of things. There's got to be more to the story than this clip alleges or the actions would be illegal.

It seems a legal injunction would be pretty much guaranteed if the farmers had any legal standing, simply due to the irreparable harm it would cause to lose water during a growing season.

TheButcher · Friday at 10:50 PM

appaloosa said:
Well they can shut it off now, or keep depleting the aquifer until it is gone? What would you suggest they do?

Can the state create water? Does the price tag pay for existing water or create new water? I’ll answer this for you: Nope! The state does not create water. Charging them for water is a money grab and doesn’t create water.

Skidmore · Friday at 11:14 PM

There’s plenty of water !

Togwotee · Saturday at 8:14 AM

This has been a problem for some time and there's a lot more to the story. they're simply taking too much ground water and it's going to have to be mitigated with surface water or they'll be cut off permanently.

The shut off was lifted a few days ago for this season.

gundog2 · Saturday at 8:50 AM

Restrictions like this need to be implemented slowly so that the water users can make adjustments to make their practices more sustainable. I don’t know if these restrictions were really necessary, but we as a society tend to wait until things come to a head before we really try to address the problem. I’d like to know more about this story. Did the water regulators give people any warnings that something like this might necessary?

eelgrass · Saturday at 9:31 AM

I ordered 100 bags of frozen french fries from Winco this morning. Why take a chance?

appaloosa · Saturday at 3:38 PM

grizzly said:
What's the other side of the story?

Junior water rights? No water rights?

I've dealt with the purchase of water in Idaho, so I'm somewhat familiar with that side of things. There's got to be more to the story than this clip alleges or the actions would be illegal.

It seems a legal injunction would be pretty much guaranteed if the farmers had any legal standing, simply due to the irreparable harm it would cause to lose water during a growing season.

The water users being curtailed are ground water users. They are pumping the aquifer faster than it is being replenished.
They can post rhetoric online and rally the masses, but it still doesn't address the real issue: they are using up water faster than it is coming back. Let them pump it dry if that makes them happy! Effing morons!

Skidmore · Saturday at 5:26 PM

appaloosa said:
The water users being curtailed are ground water users. They are pumping the aquifer faster than it is being replenished.
They can post rhetoric online and rally the masses, but it still doesn't address the real issue: they are using up water faster than it is coming back. Let them pump it dry if that makes them happy! Effing morons!