Agricultural Water Rates

Jamie Kidston's letter to the editor today provided people opposed to the area's high water rates with just as much fodder as he does to supporting the current low ag rate.
See if you can find it.
All right...to save time the phrases were highlighted and underscored.



"I am replying to Gerry Laarakker's letter of June 28 concerning agricultural water.  The rate per cubic meter paid by farmers for agricultural water is far lower than the domestic rate and for good reason.

Farmers do not need treated water.  However treated water is today being utilized on a significant proportion of the local farm land.  Why?

To understand how this came about, we have to go back to the early 1960s when the politicians of Vernon, Coldstream and the surrounding areas decided to utilize chlorinated agricultural water to meet the escalating domestic water needs.

They contracted with the agricultural supplier, the Vernon Irrigation District, to provide this water, which met domestic water standards in force at the time.  All water was distributed through one common set of pipes.

This dual use water system worked well for the next 20 years.  It allowed for the growth in urban residential areas, plus commercial and industrial interests.

At the same time, owners of the many rural properties in the area had a dependable supply of water for their homes and fields.

However, in the 1990s, new domestic water standards were introduced which made it necessary to improve the water quality by means of enhanced treatment.

Since treatment is expensive and agricultural water does not require same, the technical solution was to have two separate sets of pipes to deliver the two types of water.  Of course there is also a cost to building a separated system.

Over the past decade a considerable effort has been made to separate many domestic water connections from the agricultural source.  This work continues.

However, there is still a significant amount of treated water being utilized on farm land.

We need to continue with more separation projects, bearing in mind that it may not be cost effective to have complete separation.

The objective should be to have an affordable domestic water supply but also an agricultural supply which is competitive with other farming areas in the Okanagan. (underscore/italicized: blog author)

The untreated pressurized agricultural water system put in place some 40 years ago still meets the industry's present and future needs.

Moreover, ensuring that the agricultural rates are competitive will allow for significant economic benefits to be continually derived by the community."
                                                                   Jamie Kidston


"So how about area golf courses paying 10 to 20 times what golf courses in the Kelowna area pay?" asks Kia, adding "what's competitive about that?" 

'Xactly, as the saying goes.

But Jamie Kidston doesn't need ag water anymore.
He subdivided his Coldstream ALR orchard into three parcels then sold them. 
It was probably important to have economic benefits accrue, as he indicated.
Otherwise he would've kept the orchards.


The Freudian Slip of the week?
The Morning Star's editorial today "Process Followed for Drought Plan" contained the following sentence:

"That plan first originated in 2010 when a drought response team was established.  It was compromised (sic...comprised!) of 26 individuals from throughout the community, including the hospitality sector, landscapers, farmers, government agencies and rank-and-file residents."

Compromised?  (Meaning:  Less than desirable consequences)

The editorial is probably already thinking of this year's ready-to-form SAC committee.

 

Either way, Jamie's letter seems to support an Adopted Motion from Coldstream Mayor Garlick in which "need of supply type" was unanimously agreed at a GVAC meeting. 

In other words, you pay for the supply type you need.
Not the supply type that GVW has you stuck with!