MY TURN.... No evidence to support water scarcity claim

A Kootenai County commissioner recently wrote an opinion piece in The Press, touching on water scarcity and water rights as it pertains to the proposed downzoning within the Coeur d’Alene Reservation.

In this piece, the commissioner argued “Restricting density when water is already a scarce resource is arguably a reasonable approach to preserving property rights and land values.”

While water scarcity is certainly frightening, no evidence has been presented to support this claim other than an anecdote of the underperforming Worley well. It is a far stretch to assume that the entire area proposed for downzoning is facing the same issues as this single well.

To the contrary, available data shows this area to produce high-yielding wells, especially in the northern “Country” designation. Furthermore, changing the zoning to agricultural may have the unintended consequence of exponentially increasing water consumption.

Well drillers are required to provide detailed well logs, which gives us valuable data to assess the overall availability of water in an area at time of drilling. The breakdown below is data of recently drilled wells from the Idaho Department of Water Resources Well Map.

Attributes of wells drilled in four areas of Kootenai County over the last three years (8/1/20-8/1/23):

1) Cd'A Reservation

Wells Drilled: 85

Average Production: 25.1 GPM

Average Depth: 401 Feet

Dry Wells: 1 (1%)

Wells over 5gpm: 75 (88%)

2) Cd'A Reservation “Country” Designation

Wells Drilled: 54

Average Production: 28.6 GPM

Average Depth: 389 Feet

Dry Wells: 0 (0%)

Wells over 5gpm: 52 (96%)

3) All of Kootenai County (outside Reservation Boundaries)

Wells Drilled 507

Average Production: 26.1 GPM

Average Depth: 466 Feet

Dry Wells: 10 (2%)

Wells over 5gpm: 449 (88%)

4) Southwest Kootenai County (outside Reservation Boundaries)

Wells Drilled: 126

Average Production: 18.6 GPM

Average Depth: 527 Feet

Dry Wells: 3 (2.4%)

Wells over 5gpm: 75 (77%)

As seen in the data, wells on the Cd'A reservation performed similarly to wells drilled in the rest of Kootenai county, which contradicts the claim that this is an area currently seeing water scarcity. Twenty-five gallons per minute is five times the standard 5 gpm minimum per residence requirement in Kootenai County Code.

Compared to Southwest Kootenai County, which includes Cougar Gulch, water availability was significantly better by all observed metrics.

The Northeast portion of the Cd'A Reservation is designated “Country” by the Comprehensive Plan’s Future Land Use Map. By every observed metric, well performance in this area was better than the rest of Kootenai County.

Suppose hypothetically that water scarcity is such an imminent threat that extreme action is justified today. Even if this were true, changing zoning to “Agricultural” could very likely increase water consumption due to the massive water use of farmland.

On average, each Idaho resident uses about 168 gallons per day in and around their home (according to NEEF). Therefore, an Idaho Family of four uses approximately 672 gallons per day, much lower than the 13,000 gallons allotment.

In contrast, irrigated farmland uses on average 488,776 gallons per acre, per year (according to the USDA). For 20 acres, this equals 26,780 gallons daily.

Therefore, even in a scenario where a 20-acre parcel is split into four parcels, the water consumption for four families would approximate 2,688 gallons per day. This is dwarfed by irrigated agricultural land which uses 10 times the water consumption!

For perspective: A single 40-acre parcel owner practicing irrigated farming consumes just as much water as a large 400-acre major subdivision with 80 homes.

Simply put, there is no reason to think forcing an agricultural designation will reduce water usage. In fact, it is likely to do the opposite.

Furthermore, Kootenai County requires a hydrogeological analysis in the subdivision process to show that development has sufficient water and will not negatively impact the water of properties nearby.

Therefore, water concerns are already accounted for in development proposals via expert analysis.

If in the future evidence does support water scarcity as an imminent threat, then targeted actions should be taken, and the water rights of the Tribe, who were here first, can be given priority over private property owners.

When government actions clash with fundamental constitutionally protected rights, the “LeastRestrictive Means” test should be applied, which stipulates that government actions taken must restrict individual freedom to the least extent possible.

The comprehensive plan clearly outlines downzoning requirements. These were applied in the Cougar Gulch downzoning, where those in opposition were allowed to opt-out, a fact which was omitted from commissioner’s column. In this situation also, we must follow the requirements of the Comprehensive Plan.

A broad sweeping downzone would deprive property owners of due process afforded to them for their unique property and location.

Joel Seale and his wife are property owners north of Worley.