A group of property owners and Arnold Irrigation District patrons are suing their irrigation district and the Natural Resources Conservation Service in an attempt to block a planned piping of a 12-mile canal. Save Arnold Canal, made up of Arnold patrons, started organizing after a draft environmental assessment of the piping project was released in June 2021.
The lawsuit alleges the plan to pipe the canal would violate the National Environmental Policy Act, the Watershed Protection and Flood Prevention Act and the Administrative Procedures Act. They claim AID failed to thoroughly explore alternatives to piping. They also are concerned with the loss of the habitat that’s formed around the canal, damage to property resulting in reduced property values and that water won’t be able to seep back into the ground to water nearby trees and recharge aquifers.
Last year, Arnold patrons told the Source Weekly their preferred solution would be to line the canal with geotextile liner and shotcrete — commonly called canal lining. Unlined canals can lose up to 50% of water that seeps into the ground, whereas lined canals only lose about 10%. No water is lost in piped canals, but seepage waters trees near the canals and can recharge aquifers.
The director of modernization at Farmers Conservation Alliance, the agency that prepared the environmental assessment, said lining was ruled out because it cost nearly twice as much in the long run because piping requires little to no maintenance. He also said piping contributes a relatively small amount to water level declines in aquifers, but that it’s paltry in comparison to withdrawals or the changing climate.
The environmental assessment says it will modernize 149 of the district’s 646 patrons’ lines, saving 32.5 cubic feet per second from seepage loss during irrigation season. The excess water will be transferred to North Unit Irrigation District, which holds the most junior water rights in the Deschutes Basin but has more commercial agricultural production than other irrigation districts in Central Oregon.
This article appears in Source Weekly October 6, 2022.
MAKE LOCAL JOURNALISM HAPPEN
Republish our articles for free, online or in print, under a Creative Commons license.
Hi Jack, thanks for this informative write-up. If COID/AID are so concerned about conservation, why do they allow precious water to dump in the desert at Mayfield Pond, Reynolds Pond and Zell Pond? How much unused water ends up at the end of the canal near Lake Billy Chinook? Why don’t they pipe the dirt-lined sub-laterals first? That wouldn’t be as expensive and farmers might welcome that.
Seems like excess water rights could be given to North Unit if COID wanted to, but they aren’t. It’s predicated on this pipe project only. Also, what is COID doing about the excessive water drawn/diverted out of the Deschutes because of an antiquated water rights system? Couldn’t they reform these rights and divvy them up more equitably? They are only willing to share the “saved” water??
“Unlined” canals are leaky, but the area next to the river isn’t unlined, it’s volcanic rock and definitely not losing 50% water there, so why do the irrigation districts focus on the area losing the least-amount of water?
Finally, if this canal is piped against the wishes of the property owners, are the irrigation districts promising to divert LESS water from the river? It sounds like they won’t, but still make statements that this is healthy for the river. How is that the case when they divert the same amount of water they have rights to?
I would love a reporter to get to the bottom of these questions. For years local reporters just regurgitate COID talking points which are well-crafted to make us think that developing a piped system (paid for by public $$ and gives COID hydroelectric power revenue) helps the Deschutes river, but I’m just not seeing it?? Would be great to understand this.
Do the property owners suing the water district realize how lame their lawsuit is and what it’s going to cost them when they lose in court? Perhaps they should chat with or at least read about the other areas dealing with drought like the good people of Coalinga, California.
https://gizmodo.com/this-california-city-is-rapidly-running-out-of-water-1849638749
They aren’t fooling anyone, we know this is all about their believing the uncovered water increases their homes values, and so they can continue to pretend they have waterfront property. They should have done a bit of research when purchasing their properties, to see that the wasteful uncovered water was not a lifetime guarantee.