I wouldn’t go very far out of my way to support or advocate for large planned communities, but I do find it real interesting that the local “old timers” here throw stones at them while all the while wastefully spewing water from one end of the North End (sidewalks won’t grow folks no matter how much you flood irrigate them) to Eagle where little 5 acre ranchetters support one or two head of recreational livestock. Glass houses folks…real thin walled glass houses. I think a nice case study might be to look a a relatively built-out Hidden Springs and compare average per household water use there against a typical suburban neighborhood. All common area landscape/parks and the school grounds in Hidden Springs are watered with effluent which must bring the overall average way down. Avimor will do the same – if they can ever sell enough homes to justify turning on their fancy $5M sewer treatment plant and returning effluent to the community!

If I remember right, the justification for Gulf War 1.0 was because Iraq was drilling near (under?) the border and tapping Kuwait’s oil rights.

Substitute water for oil and we have the same thing here. The difference is, Idaho’s regulatory agencies have never come to grips with the idea that we live in a desert and water, like oil, is finite. They just hand out drilling permits to whomever asks. That is how they drained the Snake River aquifer and they didn’t wake up until all the wells and all the springs from Burley to Bliss started going dry.

Our faithful leaders at IDWR are now over-allocating water north of eagle and they won’t stop until existing water right holder’s wells go dry and go to court to force the late comers to stop pumping.

One may then ask: What will the then inhabitants of the (poorly) planned communities do for water? Don’t ask the developers. By then, they, like the water, will be long gone.

You may be able to teach old dogs new tricks, but not the Idaho Department of Water Resources.

With today’s technology, I have to believe that the size and capacity of an aquifer can be measured. Why do we wait until someone runs out of water before we address the issue? Can’t we figure out how much growth the water supply will support before we add thousands of new homes?

Let us not forget that United Water is a subsidiary of Suez, a French company. Just wanted to remind everyone that we pay a foreign company to distribute our water. When this water gets depleted we will pay through the nose for what’s left. That will be the day that orginary folks will give up having a lawn.

Wonkster et al, #2

Avimor and Hidden Spring, by applying there waste water to local open space may not consume as much water as a conventional subdivision, but that does not mean they do not consume water. The well of an existing water right holder can be drained just as effectively by 500 homes using half as much, as 250 homes using the usual amount. At the end of the day, a dry well is still a dry well.

Cyclops is right, we do have the technology to measure aquifers. We do know how much burden a new subdivision will place on existing neighboring water right holders.

What we don’t have, is a state with the political backbone to do the right thing until it is too late.

Carey-Act,

As an example, Dry Creek Ranch is actively marketing their 1400-acre property as a planned community even though they have not yet been granted a zoning change/entitlement from Ada County. Even if they get a zoning change, my thought is that with this economy, they have absolutely no plans for seeing this project through — they’re looking to dump it, and to sell the water right to United Water. I seriously doubt that they’ll say that in their application to IDWR, but here’s where a firm grasp of reality is helpful. Why IDWR would even consider granting a municipal water right before a zoning change is made, I have no idea. This seems speculative to me in that either the plan is to sell to United Water, or to make the land more marketable for a FUTURE planned community even without the zoning change. Cyclops is right. IDWR has very little backbone and tends not to do the right thing. Why in the world would they want to recreate another adjucication nightmare by not knowing the carrying capacity of the foothills aquifer? That study is currently underway, but nobody wants to wait for it.

Clippity-

After perusing the M3 Eagle and Dry Creek Ranch water rights applications, I stand somewhat corrected. Both applications are for “municipal purposes” which allows a speculative element, in that water can be claimed for future anticipated needs. Dry Creek is anticipating 1400 homes and M3 Eagle over 4000. I don’t disagree that the main purpose in securing the water rights is to make it easier for the current owners to unload the property. It is interesting that the applicants assert that PC’s meet all the requirements of a municipality under Idaho law.

It shouldn’t take a rocket scientist to realize the aquifers of the north Ada desert are in equilibrium. Any new, substantial withdrawals will show up as depletions somewhere else. The IDWR hearing officer will indeed have his/her hands full on this one.

The issue isn’t master planned communities versus 5 acre ranchettes. It’s being a good steward of the resources and not over-allocating water in the desert. Eastern Snake River Aquifer anyone? What short memories we have. Or just Google the water battles and shortages in Georgia/Florida/Alabama and/or Southern California. No need to reinvent the waterwheel – we can learn from their mistakes. That’s not being a growth-o-phobe but smartly planning ahead. Sure wish the financial markets had done that…

Wonk/Anti:
No one’s arguing for ranchettes but since you brought it up:
M3’s 6000 acres would translate to 1200 5-acre ranchettes, which would be allowed to irrigate a half acre under IDWR policy. There’s been a moratorium on new individual wells for irrigation for many years. So your 2-cow argument’s specious.

The company has land use entitlements to 7150 houses, 2 million square feet of commercial and 6 or 7 schools plus two golf courses.
Their request to IDWR is for up to 14 million gallons a day withdrawn from aquifer(s) which, as clippity notes, are unmapped.
There’s a reason the foothills were ranched (with water trucked in, BTW) not farmed.

Build houses like the camper I lived in. Gray water storage tanks. Limited potable water. GPM gauges on the faucet and shower to keep and eye on usage. Gray water to flush the toilets. Xeriscaped yards. Passive Solar homes arranged to take advantage of our natural setting. Solar Panels and Wind Generators installed on homes but owned and operated by the HOA. I would support that community…I’d like to live in it. Hey developers! I want to buy a 2400 sq.ft. house but I want 1200 sq.ft. of it to be basement. Small footprint; more space for veggies and trees. Make sure my house can charge my lifted 4×4 electric truck.

I’m a current 5 acre owner in the area potentially impacted by Dry Creek Development. In our case, well water is the only source for drinking, household use, and irrigation of less than half of our 5 acres. I’m not afraid of growth or planned developments, I just want the water rights I have had to pay for and maintain to be protected. If my well which has been consistently producing for over 30 years suddenly goes dry, I am left without the ability to sustain life on my property… Not cattle, not 5 acres of pastures, my life and my children’s. Just another perspective to add to the discussion.