Special Areas requests for water

[cakadu]

The irrigation districts are continually asking for more water - when does enough become enough? From what I can see from having driven around in the southern part of the province, we do not use the most efficient forms of irrigation that are available. Drip irrigation systems are far more efficient and make better use of the water than the current systems we use now where some of the water is lost to evaporation before it ever hits the ground. Granted, it isn't taken out of the hydrological cycle, but it doesn't meet it's intended use either.

It is an inescapable fact that money attracts money which is the reason why the cities just keep getting bigger and more people move to them.

What would make me happier about the situation is if the area had some value-added industries lined up so that when the water is available it can be put to use straight away. Right now, it is all pretty much speculation and best estimates.

From a societal perspective, it isn't the lack of water that is the problem for the more rural areas of the province. I will use the Peace again as an example. There is generally more than enough water in the peace region. What is stopping people from moving up there?

[farmers_son]

“Money attracts money which is why the cities just keep getting bigger…”

I might offer the thought that one reason cities keep getting bigger is that the cities receive an unfair transfer of taxation dollars generated from the primary resource industries such as agriculture which are always located in the hinterlands but do not have the population base to demand that government reinvest in the countryside.
See: http://www.rural.gov.ab.ca/ralo_report.pdf

Your example of the Peace... Sporadic, unpredictable and uneven amounts of rainfall does not equal irrigation. Irrigation is a guaranteed source of water that allows the producer to maximize his/her production instead of managing for drought as is the case in the Special Areas at present. I would expect to see value adding occur in the Special Areas as a result of this initiative, feedlots and hog barns would spring up as soon as the water was available. Most of the benefit from the water diversion would be as a direct result of access to livestock water, the actual acres that would benefit from irrigation would be less.

[cakadu]

I keep asking myself why we want the land to do something it was never intended to do? We try to raise annual crops on marginal land and wonder why the bounty isn't there. We try to grow crops on land that is better suited to grass growth, yet we still persist in trying to grow crops. And the biggest wonderment o all is why we want to grow more of what we can't already sell at a price that will put some decent money in a producer's pockets.

The situation that is happening in the Special Areas - aside from the water - is not unique. People moving away, leaving farming etc. is happening in just about every rural area that there is, regardless of whether there is water or not. Does that mean that all rural areas will be given the cash injection to get them whatever they need in order to survive and/or grow? Don't get me wrong, I am all for rural revitalization.

The other thing that we haven't even given much consideration to is what cumulative effect will all this drilling activity have on the underground formations? We have some idea, but we certainly have no concrete evidence or body of knowledge with respect to the flurry of drilling activity and how it will cumulatively affect our groundwater supplies. I look at all the proposed activity within my own county and shudder to think of where it will all end up, especially now that oil has hit $60/bbl.

All of the things that we are doing cannot be looked at in isolation. If you talk to any of the irrigation managers down south, they never have enough water and are always looking for more and god forbid you talk about not being able to meet their allocations.

The solutions also cannot be looked at in isolation. One needs to look at the greater good in all of this. Speculating that the value-added industries will move out there because there is water is just that - speculation. You have people that want activities for their kids. Even in my own little community the parents often go outside of the community for the activities their kids participate in because they just aren't here or in the alternative, aren't up to the parents expectations of where their kids are at or their potential.

How many people have moved to the south because of irrigation? How many industries went there? 60% of the industries in the Lethbridge area are owned by American companies and are the goliaths that many are fighting against.

Should we share our resources with others who don't have them - yes. How we do that and how much we do that is something else. I'm curious, how many of you would be as willing to share if the water were coming out of your basin? It's always easier to spend someone else's "money".

I forget who said it but the quote goes something like, "...in the past, wars were fought for many reasons, in the future, wars will be fought over water."

[grassfarmer]

I share many of your concerns on this topic Cakadu. You are right that we should ponder the value of the crops that will be grown under these new irrigation projects. I hope it's not barley silage for yet more feedlots given the predicament of the beef sector. It's notable that most in favour are quoting all the amounts of water that are currently flooding southern Alberta - what about the dry years in the Oldman watershed? the irrigation places that had their allocations cut and saw their crops wither in the recent drought years even with their expensive irrigation. We need to look at water use on a broader basis before deciding we have enough for this project.
To maintain agriculture in the drier areas we need more than water, we need a viable return for their produce.

Maybe if they were to grow the best quality grassfed, longhorn beef in North America and sell it direct to US consumers at $5lb hanging weight they could make more money than growing barley, feedlot silage or confinement hogs once all the fertiliser, fuel, spray, machinery,transport, manure hauling and irrigation costs are paid?
Bear in mind that we have only a finite supply of oil and severe limitations on water availability which make the high tech farming route environmentally unsustainable.

[cowman]

I will admit I haven't got out to any meetings on this proposed water diversion, so might not be up on all the facts and figures, however I do believe the main idea was not so much irrigation but water for livestock operations, homes and industry?
In my opinion this is about the best idea I've heard in a long time for many reasons. The establishment of a viable intensive livestock industry away from the populated areas is a good thing. Special areas has lots of open spaces and they are eager to have these operations, the corrider doesn't want anymore CFOs...looks like the perfect solution to me!
The mayor of Red Deer put it very well I thought? He said he really doesn't care where the water goes after Red Deer has taken what it needs!
The concept of at least one large dam and a series of created wet lands into Stettler county is a very good idea. A pipeline to serve the needs of special areas is then very feasable?
Consider the spin off benifits of a large reservoir on the eastern boundary of Red Deer County? Consider the economic activity that will be generated? As much as people bemoan the loss of their rural livestyle around Glennifer Lake the reality is the infrastructure has been vastly improved to service the Lake developement and their own net worth has risen sharply!
Quite simply their property is worth more today than it would have been if the dam wasn't there?
The quality of the water below the dam is much better than it was before the dam was built. That is just a fact.
I'm old enough to remember how it was before the dam was built. Practically every year Red Deer got a big flood in the spring and the river got very low in the fall. Now, with the dam, the water is fairly consistant? Without a doubt the dam helped a lot in the recent flood.
Personally I would much rather see my various governments spend my tax money on something like this than blowing it on such wonderful things as adscam, gun registry, Canadian Wheat Board, free give aways to brutal dictators, making us all speak French! And I would much rather see the water go to some needy farmers out east than poured down an old oil well so they can water it out before its time! Of course I doubt those "needy farmers" are slipping a few bucks to the Klein Tories!

[cropduster]

Thanks for your comments Cowman!Maybe there should be a thread on just what is a Klein Tory!

[blackjack]

...from what I understand the plan would be to use the Berry creek and the Sounding creek as a natural canals...I haven't been there for a while but alot of people on the east side of province use the lake at Sherness mine for rec purposes...I see it as a major positive for farmers and the towns out that way...but I could be a little bias I lived out there for eighteen years...

[blackjack]

Linda, in fact irrigation districts have cut back allottments to numerous producers over the past few years.

[blackjack]

cowman, if you think that anyone is going to be able to dictate that the Confined Feeding Industry is going to have to locate in a defined area of the province then you obviously don't know just how strong their lobby group is.
Municipalities are having a difficult time defining specified zoning for CFO's, much less the Province trying it.

Not trying to put words in your mouth but is it your view that if a family wished to construct a feedlot, hogbarn, dairy or poultry operation they would be advised that it must locate in Special Areas or some such place? What are you going to tell the colonys that are continually expanding their feeding operations, and new colonys that are locating in various municipalities.
Might be fun to hear the reaction when they were told they had to relocate to a specified area !!!

Equipment dealers would be on the rampage if all the cfo customers were in one location vs having them spread around and the dollars they inject into the urban economy spread around.

It would be interesting to hear the response of the commodity groups to your suggestion.


A very unique idea cowman, but I doubt if it will ever fly.

[cakadu]

Does anyone remember Taiwan Sugars attempts to build out in that area? Shot down flat. Would have brought all the things that you are talking about as being benefits to the area, but the people there did NOT want it. Will they be any more willing now?

Cowman, I agree with the comment that once the water flows by here, what difference does it make? Well, it might make some in the future because to my knowledge we have no long-term studies done on the groundwater and recharging. They would be expensive and for the long haul to be sure.

The real concern that I had about the meeting(s) is that there are no presentations and to some extent I can understand them not wanting to give presentations because it controls the process and takes any thunder there might be away from grandstanders. Having said that though, if you control the process, you control the outcome to some extent as well. After you watch this taped presentation, then you can go around the room and look at various displays and talk with people. You are also given a 4 page document to read - with all the "answers" to the evaluation form that they want you to fill out. They strongly encourage you to fill the form out before you leave - ostensibly because if you take it home, then you won't fill it out.

Based on the information you are given you are supposed to give an evaluation even though you may need time to process all of the information given.

There doesn't seem to be much of a response in terms of who will move out there, if the water is available.

I also don't foresee the head offices of many companies locating in this area even with water. There seems to be a number of assumptions made and the biggest one is that people will flock to the area if there is water and so far I have seen no evidence in support of this.

My ambivalence about this project keeps growing and I am certainly not convinced that this is the best use of the amount of money that this will take - not only to build it, but to operate it annually. Sure the economic benefit is pegged at 70 cents on the dollar, but how long will it actually take to reap the benefit. Models work fine and so does theory, but reality is another matter entirely.