Pilot program that pays irrigating farmers for their water rights helps Nevada aquifers recover from overuse

Retiring groundwater rights helps depleted aquifers 
recover from overuse. (The Nature Conservancy map)

After years of battling water overuse by irrigating farmers, Nevada officials decided to use $25 million in federal funding to launch a pilot program that paid farmers for their water rights," reports Daniel Rothberg of The Daily Yonder. Once the state compensated irrigators for their groundwater rights, the state would retire the rights and no longer allow irrigation from that land, thereby conserving water.

Launched in 2023, the program has proved to be an effective way to protect some of the state's threatened aquifers. In fact, Nevada has used "federal funds to retire about 22,500 acre-feet of water, roughly the same amount of water Nevada was required to cut from its Colorado River allocation last year," Rothberg explains.

State water officials have been pleasantly surprised at how popular the pay-for-groundwater-rights option has become. Rothberg reports, "There was so much demand that two bills, passed unanimously by the Democratic-controlled Legislature and signed by Republican Gov. Joe Lombardo in 2025, allow for the expansion of the program."

After asking lots of questions, alfalfa farmer Denise Moyle decided to sell some of her groundwater rights to the state. Moyle shared the thought process she and many area farmers consider when debating groundwater rights sales: "If I sell a little bit of water and I pay off debt, do I have to farm as hard? Do I have to pump as hard? Do I have to go for three (alfalfa) cuttings? Can I just do two cuttings?"

Meanwhile, state water officials and conservationists are considering how to keep the program going, which could lean on donations and federal funding. "A donation could target a specific area or ecosystem in need of protection from groundwater overuse," Rothberg explains. "But state funding would help to raise matching federal dollars and maximize the program’s value."

Rural Nevada leaders seek a voice in massive energy builds, but almost 80% of their land is federally managed

Across western federal lands, some renewable energy expansion is going at such a frenetic pace that rural county officials in Nevada can't keep up with the requests, reports Jeniffer Solis of the Nevada Current. "Several rural counties are now asking state lawmakers to establish a policy requiring federal agencies to coordinate all their land use planning and management decisions with state and county governments when considering massive utility-scale energy projects. . . . As of June, there are over 130 pending applications to build renewable energy projects across Nevada’s public lands. Most of those projects are in rural counties, where as much as 80% of land is federally managed."

NV Energy photo

Currently, Nevada lacks a statewide utility-scale solar plan, which exacerbates the problem for local governments.  In fact, county officials from Eureka and Lander County told state lawmakers that managing the sheer number of clean energy projects coming to their offices isn't workable because they lack staff and management capacity. Solis writes. "Rural governments told lawmakers that the intensity and scale of utility-scale energy proposals they are seeing in their counties will require targeted state policy to support and protect rural economies."

Eureka and Lander County lands are included in the "proposed Greenlink North Transmission Project — a 235-mile transmission line along Highway 50, which is expected to attract more solar projects in the coming years," Solis explains. And while the project is expected to bring thousands of good-paying jobs to the state, county officials want their offices and residents to have a say in local installations and time to prepare for the profound changes the builds are sure to bring.

Eureka County’s natural resources manager, Jake Tibbitts, "proposed amending state policy to clarify that federal agencies are expected to enter formal agreements with local governments in Nevada when considering projects on public land in their county," Solis reports. "Under the proposed amendment, those agreements would need to include a detailed coordination plan. . .especially when addressing conflicts between local land use plans and federal plans."

Solis adds, "But like Nevada as a whole, land in Eureka County is largely administered by the Bureau of Land Management and the Forest Service, leaving the county at the whims of federal land use policy."

Newspaper series focuses on water crisis looming for 30 million dependent on the Colorado River

The West is fast running out of water. Its lifeblood, the Colorado River, reports Utah's Deseret News, "is being hemorrhaged by cities, by farms and ranches, by power plants and by the more than 30 million people who depend on its water in the United States and another 6 million people in Mexico." (Photo of the Colorado River in Southern Utah by Tom Smart)

In a three-part series aimed at explaining the extent of the crisis, reporter Amy Joi Donoghue writes that this year's flows "are near historic lows with runoff about a third of average, pushing the seven states that share the river toward another year of drought." And, continues Donoghue, "Those stresses are further trumped by the dire predictions provided by the agency managing the Colorado River system, forecasting demand far outstripping supply during the next 50 years, reaching crisis levels within two decades. It reveals a coming tug-of-war over water resources that may pit state against state in the fight for new development, jobs, housing and force an answer to one of the West's most enduring questions: Who is entitled to the water?" (Read more)

More problems facing the region is offered by Jodi Peterson, writing in The Goat Blog on the High Country News website:
1) A U.S. Geological Survey study predicts that within 15 years, the population in the region served by the river will increase to 45 million.
2) By 2050, climate change will warm the basin and dry out its soil to an extent not seen since the 1930s Dust Bowl.
3) By the end of this century, the basin will see a 20 percent decrease in runoff, thanks to warming temperatures and earlier spring runoff.
4) Snowpack across the basin was well below average this year, less than half of normal.
Severe, even record-setting drought is foreseen for Utah, Wyoming, Colorado and New Mexico. (Read more)

Election may show waning rural influence in Nev.

Many attribute Barack Obama's victory in Nevada to his ability to narrow the gap in the rural vote by 14 percent. But election analysis shows that Nevada's urban vote went so heavily in favor of Obama that he would have won the state without his rural support. This occurrence has many wondering if the rural vote's influence in Nevada is waning.

"Democratic gains in Nevada’s urban areas overwhelmed the rural vote," writes Alexandra Berzon of the Las Vegas Sun. "Nearly 9,000 more ballots were cast in rural counties than in the previous presidential election, but the rural vote dropped nearly one point as a percentage of the state’s electorate."

Republicans are alarmed. Reece Keener, Republican chairman in Elko, told Berzon, "We used to really be able to leverage things in rural Nevada — just the sheer numbers there. ... We’ll still see Republicans campaigning here because we’ll continue to be an important source of votes. But we just don’t have the pull that we once did."

But many see this election as unique. They point out that the urban vote in future elections is unlikely to go entirely for one candidate, which would increase the importance of rural votes in the state. University of Nevada-Reno political-science professor Erik Herzik put it this way: "In 2010 will the George Bush-factor be around? Will the Obama charisma factor be around? Will all these new voters be around? If you’re answering no to any of those questions, you’re going to need every vote you can get."(Read more)

McCain wins rural Florida; Obama's campaign touts his own rural strength, a milestone of recognition

As Arizona Sen. John McCain rode a strong rural vote in Florida to become the Republican front-runner for president, Democrats looked ahead to Super Tuesday next week and advisers to Illinois Sen. Barack Obama touted his rural strength. (Associated Press photo by Charles Dharapak, via The Ledger, Lakeland, Fla., in Polk County, which McCain carried)

In the networks' exit poll, 11 percent of Florida Republicans were classified as rural, those voting at precincts outside metropolitan areas. McCain won 40 percent of that segment, while former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney got 27 percent. Former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee got 20 percent of the rural vote and former New York Mayor Rudy Giuliani got 9 percent. Romney and McCain were statistically even among urban Republicans, but McCain beat him 36-30 in suburbs, which provided 64 percent of the exit poll sample.

UPDATE, Wed., Jan. 30: When the actual vote is divided by metropolitan-area and city boundaries, McCain did better in urban areas (36.2 percent) than rural (34.3 percent), reports the Daily Yonder, which focuses on "exurban" voters, those "partly rural communities around the edges of cities." Such communities "are more conservative than either more rural communities or cities." Romney won those areas, and they are where Huckabee did best.

"One thing for sure, the exit-poll designations of what is rural, urban and suburban don't conform with the votes on the ground," the Yonder says. "Exit polling in Florida said Clinton won 45 percent of the urban vote. She pulled 50.4 percent on the ground. Exit polls said Obama won 40 percent of the urban vote. He won 33.6 percent of the vote in urban counties." (Read more)

Florida was not a good measuring stick for Democrats because the candidates did not campaign there, with no delegates at stake because the state scheduled the primary before national Democratic leaders wanted. In a conference call with reporters Tuesday, Obama's campaign manager cited his candidate's rural and small-town performance in other states "for the first time in the campaign," Al Giordano writes in The Field. "We think we’re going to do very well in rural areas on February 5 and that’s going to make a difference in delegates," David Plouffe said.

Plouffe said Obama "did much better in the northern and rural districts" of Nevada than Clinton did. However, Clinton's campaign has said she won rural Nevada, apparently based on the networks' caucus-entrance poll, which had her winning the sample rural precincts 44 to 42 percent (within the poll's margin of error). But as Giordano notes, "Plouffe’s statements today mark a milestone in the efforts of rural voters to be recognized for their true worth as an important group of voters." (Read more)

Obama does well in rural S.C.; Democrats keep winning turnout battle, rural areas included

Barack Obama won rural South Carolina by about the same percentage that he won the whole state in today's presidential primary, according to the networks' exit poll, which gave him 52 percent of the rural vote to 27 percent for Hillary Clinton and 21 percent for John Edwards. The statewide vote was 55-27-18. (Photo: Obama at National Rural Summit candidate forum in Iowa Oct. 27)

The exit poll identified 36 percent of voters as rural, 48 percent as suburban and 15 percent as urban, based on the location of their precinct: outside a metropolitan area, inside a metro area but outside a central city, and inside the city, respectively. When the actual vote is divided between counties inside and outside metro areas, Obama did even better than statewide. "Rural counties gave him his widest margin of victory, 59 percent," reports the Daily Yonder. (Read more)

Perhaps more importantly, the first Southern presidential primary and the first with a significant African American vote continued a trend of higher turnout in Democratic primaries and caucuses than in Republican contests, according to Al Giordano in The Field, the blog of Rural Votes. "It looks like, for the first time in history, more South Carolinians voted in the Democratic presidential primary than on the Republican side. An estimated 23 percent of today’s vote came from Independents," Giordano notes, drawing from the exit poll.

One little-known fact from the Survey USA robo-polling firm, via Mark Nickolas on Political Base: "Voters in SC may only vote once. Not twice. If you voted last week, you may not vote this week. But if you did not vote last week, even if you are a Republican, you may vote this week, in the Democratic primary." Thus, Republicans got first crack at the independents, but Democrats drew more of them.

The phenomenon of stronger Democratic turnout also occurred in rural areas of the first three states that voted, according to Niel Ritchie, executive director of the League of Rural Voters, which defines itself as "progressive." In an article this week, Ritchie wrote, "Lost in the media’s preferred storyline of gender vs. race in the 2008 Democratic primary is the massive increase in the number of rural voters and the steady migration of these voters away from the Republican Party. . . . All three states saw record rural turnout far exceeding that of the Republican Party."

Ritchie said that should be no surprise. "The last decade has seen Wall Street grabbing the lion’s share of the economic 'boom' while rural Americans endlessly waited for the promised benefits of 'free trade' to manifest," Ritchie wrote. "Rural America is now ground zero in the war to consolidate global corporations, with the corrosive spread of big-box retail threatening the fabric of rural communities. And with the disproportionate number of troops in Iraq coming from rural Reserve and National Guard units – many of whom served in critical roles at home as volunteer fire fighters, police officers and paramedics – rural America has paid more than its fair share in blood and treasure." (Read more)

Finally, one last note on rural caucus-goers in Nevada, who went for Clinton in the entrance poll (within the error margin) but for Obama if the vote is divided between metropolitan and non-metro counties. "Obama beat rival Hillary Clinton decisively in nine of 14 rural Republican-dominated counties," notes Alexandra Berzon of the Las Vegas Sun. Nevada Democrats said Obama showed them how to win in rural areas, which usually vote Republican. Cindy Trigg, a rural Democratic organizer, told the Sun, “Now any campaign will know that if you court the rurals you can have a tip in your favor.” Obama organizer Lance Whitney said, “People in rural areas see themselves in Barack Obama. They see him as a true American success story. They see him as representing something new and fresh.” (Read more)

Did Obama or Clinton carry rural Nevada? It probably depends on how you define 'rural'

We weren't planning to write about the rural vote in Nevada's presidential caucuses, since the race there was close and the Silver State is the third least rural state, using the most common definition of "rural." But now the Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama campaigns are saying that each of their candidates carried the rural areas of Nevada, and their argument helps illustrate the difficulty in defining just what is rural.

Clinton won the statewide vote, 51 to 45 percent, but news reports generally gave the rural vote to the Illinois senator. "Obama pointed to his strong showing in rural areas, where Democrats traditionally struggle," wrote Anjeanette Damon in the Reno Gazette-Journal, adopting language from Obama's press release: "We performed well all across the state, including rural areas where Democrats have traditionally struggled." The New York Times reports, "Obama noted that he had received one more delegate in Nevada than Mrs. Clinton because of a strong performance in precincts outside Las Vegas," seat of Clark County, which cast almost three-fourths of the state's vote. Clinton "handily won Clark County," The Times' Jeff Zeleny and Jennifer Steinhauer write.

The Daily Yonder says Obama carried the rural vote, 47 to 43 percent, based on the vote in counties inside and outside metropolitan areas. (Click here for a county-by-county list, boken down between metropolitan and non-metro counties.) However, Clinton adviser Howard Wolfson said on CBS's "Face the Nation" this morning that Clinton carried the rural vote.

UPDATE, Jan. 21: The Clinton campaign still has not responded to our requests for an explanation, but we now believe Wolfson was referring to the CNN entrance poll, which had Clinton winning 44 to 42 percent (within the error margin) in areas that were defined as rural based on the size of the caucus-goer's community. Thanks to Keating Holland at CNN, who explained to us that a caucus-goer was classified as urban if the precinct was inside the city limits of a major city, suburban if outside those limits but inside a metropolitan area, and rural if outside a metro area.

The entrance poll identified 12 percent of caucus-goers as rural, the same percentage as the actual vote cast in non-metro counties. The poll showed Clinton winning suburbs (46 percent of the total) 49 to 43 percent and urban areas (42 percent of the total) 46 to 41.

CNN's method emphasizes speed over the sort of demographic accuracy we seek here. It is the latest way we have heard of defining "rural," which can also be defined as population outside defined places of 2,500 population or more. The most common, and crudest, way is the metro vs. non-metro definition, under which Nevada is the third least rural state, with only 8.49 percent of its 2000 population in "rural areas." But in the West, including Nevada, huge counties with many rural areas are included in Standard Metropolitan Statistical Areas. For example, using the metro-area definition, California is the least rural state. (New Jersey ranks between California and Nevada.)

Assuming that Obama carried rural areas, Al Giordano writes in The Field, "It’s fascinating because many urban and suburban liberals often malign rural Americans as somehow being more prejudiced against African-Americans than they. Well, in three states in a row, the rural voters went for the senator from Chicago."

For the Daily Yonder's report on the rural vote in South Carolina, where John McCain beat Mike Huckabee by slightly more than his statewide margin, click here.

Community newspapers still strong, especially if they have interactive Web sites, Calif. editor says

"The death of newspapers has been greatly exaggerated," and that's especially true when it comes to community papers, writes Jeff Pelline, right, editor of The Union in Grass Valley, Calif., population 11,000. That's in Nevada County, pop. 92,000, where Interstate 80 enters the state and cuts through the Sierra Nevada.

"At profitable community papers such as The Union, circulation is strong and Web traffic is growing sharply, because we provide unique local information that is now the "sweet spot" of journalism. Bigger papers are following suit in some cases, focusing on so-called hyperlocal journalism," writes Pelline, a former editor at CNET, a technology news outlet. "Though paid print circulation has been sliding (for decades, in fact), readership -- as measured by combined print and online audiences - in most cases is growing. In this sense, the Web has been a boon for newspapers (at least ones with interactive Web sites). . . . Newspapers have to work harder to make their Web sites more profitable. But a growing, interactive readership is a big plus, compared with most radio and TV stations. "

The Union is owned by Reno-based Swift Communications, which publishes newspapers in California, Oregon, Nevada and Colorado, and farmer-rancher publications in Nebraska and South Dakota. Pelline is among a group of California editors and journalism professors who recently made recommendations for changes in journalism education to match "the changing media landscape," as he put it. "As a group, we conceded that too many journalists and journalism professors resist change, even though they teach and write about change almost daily." To read the recommendations and the rest of his column, click here.

Obama's heading to Nevada tomorrow, but his rural advisory committee is all Iowa

U.S. Sen. Barack Obama (D-Ill.) will bring his rural "listening tour" to the Republican stronghold of Elko, Nev., tomorrow, but his rural emphasis remains on the first presidential-caucus state, Iowa (where this campaign photo was taken). He plans to have a "rural summit" in Iowa at mid-month, and all three members of his "rural advisory committee" are from Iowa, Bill Bishop noted this week in the Daily Yonder, calling it "policy-making on the fly."

"Farming is different, we presume, in Louisiana — and in Appalachia, the issues have nothing to do with farming at all. No matter. The election is in Iowa, so that’s where Obama will develop his rural platform," which is rapidly developing: "Obama is following Iowa Sen. Tom Harkin on the farm bill. . . . Obama says he agrees with Harkin that there should be more 'emphasis on nutrition.' Obama likes ethanol. Obama would put limits on farm subsidies. . . . supports expanding broadband Internet in rural areas . . . said community colleges don’t receive enough financial support."

Anjeanette Damon of the Reno Gazette-Journal advances Obama's visit to Elko, noting it has "about 4,500 active Democratic voters, 24 percent of the electorate in a county 56 percent Republican. (Read more) In an earlier story, she noted, "The caucus rules are written in a way to make ignoring any region of the state difficult. . . . Under state law, smaller counties are allotted more delegates per voter than larger counties. That means campaigns have to convince fewer people in rural counties for the same number of delegates they might win in more populous counties." (Read more)

Retired Army Gen. John Abizaid says Northern Nevada is like the Afghanistan-Pakistan border

Retired Army Gen. John P. Abizaid now lives in or near Minden, Nev., about 10 miles south of the state capital of Carson City. Anjeanette Damon of the Reno Gazette-Journal said in a post on the paper's Inside Nevada Politics blog that Abizaid said some interesting things about his new neighbors in rural Northern Nevada. She quoted from the Inside the Pentagon newsletter, which had Abizaid saying:

"It's kind of like the Pakistan-Afghanistan border area. All the locals are armed. They absolutely hate the federal government. And there's a certain amount of drugs that pass back and forth across the border. So, for those of you who are not in a militia, please come and see me because I'm starting one up there." (Original article is available for $5 from InsideDefense.com's NewsStand.)

Damon backgrounds: "Abizaid spent four years as U.S. Central Command chief, overseeing the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, as well as other military operations involving critical Middle Eastern countries. His retirement coincided with Bush's surge in Iraq. Abizaid wasn't known as a proponent of the surge and had testified to Congress that the Army couldn't sustain an additional 20,000 troops. Bush ordered a surge of 30,000. According to the Weekly Standard, Abizaid's philosophy in the middle of the war was that American troops acted more as an 'irritant' than a solution and that Iraqi forces would become too reliant upon them for counterinsurgency work." (Read more) Thanks to Rocky Mountain Report for the tip.