Thursday, August 22, 2013
Wednesday, January 23, 2013
2 Steps in Rural Development
Yesterday I had the chance to hear Jeff Yost, Founder and CEO of Nebraska Community Foundation, talk about issues in rural development. He focused mainly on grass roots initiatives and detailed how NCF is working to enable and help communities build a more sustainable infrastructure.
One point that I thought was particularly interesting was when he began to analyze the beginning steps in community building. There is no doubt that many smaller Nebraskan communities will benefit from working with surrounding communities when it comes to larger more complex projects. The first step he called "bonding capital." Before a community can begin to work with other communities, or even start projects on their own, they must first take a look at who they are and where they are. The community must first look at what their own strengths and weakness are, what they do well and what they might benefit from collaborating and working with surrounding communities.
The second step would be to build "bridging capital." This involves working with surrounding communities and understanding what they do well and might offer your community, as well as, what their needs are and whether you are in a position to help them adequately address their needs.
This two-step process struck me as fairly simple but often overlooked. It is always a good idea to stop and take inventory of your own situation before you begin to accept help or try to offer help to others. Once a community sits down and really contemplates their own situation they are in a much better place to access what they need from other communities.
This process also helps the State address issues in rural communities because these communities will know exactly what they want and need rather than having the State address what they think the community will benefit from. This will in turn lead to a better allocation of public funds and a stronger sense of community in some of these places where that has begun to die out.
One point that I thought was particularly interesting was when he began to analyze the beginning steps in community building. There is no doubt that many smaller Nebraskan communities will benefit from working with surrounding communities when it comes to larger more complex projects. The first step he called "bonding capital." Before a community can begin to work with other communities, or even start projects on their own, they must first take a look at who they are and where they are. The community must first look at what their own strengths and weakness are, what they do well and what they might benefit from collaborating and working with surrounding communities.
The second step would be to build "bridging capital." This involves working with surrounding communities and understanding what they do well and might offer your community, as well as, what their needs are and whether you are in a position to help them adequately address their needs.
This two-step process struck me as fairly simple but often overlooked. It is always a good idea to stop and take inventory of your own situation before you begin to accept help or try to offer help to others. Once a community sits down and really contemplates their own situation they are in a much better place to access what they need from other communities.
This process also helps the State address issues in rural communities because these communities will know exactly what they want and need rather than having the State address what they think the community will benefit from. This will in turn lead to a better allocation of public funds and a stronger sense of community in some of these places where that has begun to die out.
Monday, January 21, 2013
Obama's Second Inauguration
President Obama just gave his second inaugural address and I think two main themes jump out.
First, his commitment to climate change. I really hope we can begin to invest in clean energy and development. Investment in this industry undoubtedly includes a divestiture of our investments in fossil fuels. We cannot really promote a new clean energy economy while giving so much support to fossil fuel companies. I would like to see energy industry tax breaks decrease while promoting clean energy innovation and development around the nation.
The second main point that jumped out to me was President Obama's commitment to the LGBT community. He made it clear that we cannot say we stand for freedom, liberty, and equality while oppressing a group of individuals and allowing the law to classify them as a different group of citizens. I think this will be a very big step for equality and I hope to see our country and our laws start to recognize this equality.
Sorry for the sporadic content and nature of this post but I wanted to get down my thoughts before they left me.
First, his commitment to climate change. I really hope we can begin to invest in clean energy and development. Investment in this industry undoubtedly includes a divestiture of our investments in fossil fuels. We cannot really promote a new clean energy economy while giving so much support to fossil fuel companies. I would like to see energy industry tax breaks decrease while promoting clean energy innovation and development around the nation.
The second main point that jumped out to me was President Obama's commitment to the LGBT community. He made it clear that we cannot say we stand for freedom, liberty, and equality while oppressing a group of individuals and allowing the law to classify them as a different group of citizens. I think this will be a very big step for equality and I hope to see our country and our laws start to recognize this equality.
Sorry for the sporadic content and nature of this post but I wanted to get down my thoughts before they left me.
Friday, October 19, 2012
Surface Water and Groundwater Regulation
In Nebraska, Conflict Develops Over Water Appropriations both Above-ground and Below
By Aaron John
Nebraska is not only in a conflict over water with other states, like Kansas and Colorado, but there is also conflict within the state over water appropriations. Groundwater and surface water users are finding themselves in a fight over who has claim to Nebraska’s water resources. Irrigation water is an essential element of the Nebraskan economy and some irrigators are feeling like the water has been taken literally right from under their feet.
As Nebraska water regulation developed there was little need to regulate groundwater use until 1949 when a Texas farmer changed the whole agriculture economy. That year, Frank Zybach invented a new way to distribute water to his farm fields known as center-pivot irrigation. This revolutionary new tactic made it possible for farmers to water crops using a groundwater well even when the field was not close to a stream or irrigation canal.
Through the proliferation of center-pivot irrigation systems in Nebraska and the lack of an adequate mechanism to reconcile the two systems or water use, Nebraskan farmers are finding out that water use doesn't always abide by the legal framework legislators attribute to watershed management.
Under Nebraska law, surface water users, those that use the water that is above ground, are regulated under a “first in time, first in right” system known as the prior appropriation system. A prior appropriation system regulates water users by the date in which they obtained a permit to use the water. As long as the water is being used for the same purpose, like agricultural irrigation, than the user with the most senior use permit is allowed to divert enough water to satisfy the limits of their permit.
The prior appropriation system is limited by three main distinctions. First, the system only applies to natural streams of the state and does not include drainage ditches. Secondly, differing uses of water are governed by a priority system whereby water used for domestic use carries the highest priority. After domestic use, agricultural uses take precedence over industrial or manufacturing uses. Finally, the prior appropriation system applies only to surface water users and not groundwater users.
Groundwater users, those that pull water up from below the surface, are regulated by a reasonable use system. Much like the surface water system, groundwater use gives first preference to domestic water users over agricultural users. Although, when two agricultural groundwater users are in conflict, the rule of reasonable use regulates their consumption.
The tension between the prior appropriation and the reasonable use systems develops when hydrologically connected groundwater and surface water becomes over appropriated. In some areas of Nebraska, farmers are finding out that when a groundwater well is situated close enough to a river basin the well begins to pull subsurface water from under the basin and causes the surface water to fill in this depletion. Surface water users are claiming that groundwater wells are literally taking the water right out from underneath their feet.
Surface water users are calling for a regulatory system recognizing the need to address hydrologically connected watersheds. Currently, the Department of Natural Resources regulates surface water use and Natural Resource Districts regulate groundwater use. Surface water users are claiming that there needs to be a regulatory system that will ensure that their own water supply is not being taken from them while ensuring that both groundwater and surface water users are able to use water resources efficiently.
By Aaron John
Nebraska is not only in a conflict over water with other states, like Kansas and Colorado, but there is also conflict within the state over water appropriations. Groundwater and surface water users are finding themselves in a fight over who has claim to Nebraska’s water resources. Irrigation water is an essential element of the Nebraskan economy and some irrigators are feeling like the water has been taken literally right from under their feet.
As Nebraska water regulation developed there was little need to regulate groundwater use until 1949 when a Texas farmer changed the whole agriculture economy. That year, Frank Zybach invented a new way to distribute water to his farm fields known as center-pivot irrigation. This revolutionary new tactic made it possible for farmers to water crops using a groundwater well even when the field was not close to a stream or irrigation canal.
Through the proliferation of center-pivot irrigation systems in Nebraska and the lack of an adequate mechanism to reconcile the two systems or water use, Nebraskan farmers are finding out that water use doesn't always abide by the legal framework legislators attribute to watershed management.
Under Nebraska law, surface water users, those that use the water that is above ground, are regulated under a “first in time, first in right” system known as the prior appropriation system. A prior appropriation system regulates water users by the date in which they obtained a permit to use the water. As long as the water is being used for the same purpose, like agricultural irrigation, than the user with the most senior use permit is allowed to divert enough water to satisfy the limits of their permit.
The prior appropriation system is limited by three main distinctions. First, the system only applies to natural streams of the state and does not include drainage ditches. Secondly, differing uses of water are governed by a priority system whereby water used for domestic use carries the highest priority. After domestic use, agricultural uses take precedence over industrial or manufacturing uses. Finally, the prior appropriation system applies only to surface water users and not groundwater users.
Groundwater users, those that pull water up from below the surface, are regulated by a reasonable use system. Much like the surface water system, groundwater use gives first preference to domestic water users over agricultural users. Although, when two agricultural groundwater users are in conflict, the rule of reasonable use regulates their consumption.
The tension between the prior appropriation and the reasonable use systems develops when hydrologically connected groundwater and surface water becomes over appropriated. In some areas of Nebraska, farmers are finding out that when a groundwater well is situated close enough to a river basin the well begins to pull subsurface water from under the basin and causes the surface water to fill in this depletion. Surface water users are claiming that groundwater wells are literally taking the water right out from underneath their feet.
Surface water users are calling for a regulatory system recognizing the need to address hydrologically connected watersheds. Currently, the Department of Natural Resources regulates surface water use and Natural Resource Districts regulate groundwater use. Surface water users are claiming that there needs to be a regulatory system that will ensure that their own water supply is not being taken from them while ensuring that both groundwater and surface water users are able to use water resources efficiently.
Friday, May 25, 2012
Thursday, February 16, 2012
Digital Music Greatest Hits
Ok, so I've accepted this whole new music industry that incorporates online media. I stand completely behind sharing music online because I think it puts the control more in the artists' hands. Some people download music for free or listen to it on pandora, last.fm, youtube, whatever. I think this is fine if you give some support to the band and the industry in general. One way of giving to the band is to go see them live. This is the avenue by which I've chosen to give most of my support to bands. I love live music and I think digital media has helped to make live music more enjoyable and profitable.
I listen to Phish quite a bit and I think they have a great model. You buy a ticket to the show, have a great time, and then you get a free download of the show from phish live. This gives you a soundboard professional quality recording of the show you actually saw (and maybe don't remember for various reasons). Phish allows their phans to then take these recordings and trade with other phans in accordance with their policies. This I think helps build and sustain a pretty nice community of hippies.
Another way digital music has made live performances better is that it lets the band and users decide what songs are hits and worth listening to. I started thinking about this the other day when I started looking at some of the acts that I haven't heard that I will see at the hangout festival this summer. Instead of going to their website or trying to listen to them on the radio I went to youtube. There I found a wealth of music with comments and reviews from everyday listeners like myself. I think this allows people to decide what songs are the best and give a great snapshot of an artist.
This is where the greatest hits idea comes from. Phish does not really have "greatest hits" albums, but everyone knows the best jams. Because I can get live shows from bands I have never heard of before I can get a sense of how the concert will be and what songs a band loves to play. I love the fact that I can look through setlists and decide what songs will likely be played and listen to them. If I like it than I'll try out some more of their music, if I don't like it so much than at least I gave it a try and I know that I actually listened to what the artist wants to say about themselves instead of what some industry exec whats me to think about the band.
Please do not interpret my post to be authorizing or endorsing 'pirating' or any other illegal activity. I just think a new music industry is emerging and I'm excited to see where it heads. For me, I'm gonna try and give bands the benefit of the doubt. When I listen to a new band I've never heard I'm gonna listen to the songs that the band wants people to hear and what other listeners think are their best songs. In this respect, a new 'greatest hits' designation takes form shaped by the band and user input. That excites me.
I listen to Phish quite a bit and I think they have a great model. You buy a ticket to the show, have a great time, and then you get a free download of the show from phish live. This gives you a soundboard professional quality recording of the show you actually saw (and maybe don't remember for various reasons). Phish allows their phans to then take these recordings and trade with other phans in accordance with their policies. This I think helps build and sustain a pretty nice community of hippies.
Another way digital music has made live performances better is that it lets the band and users decide what songs are hits and worth listening to. I started thinking about this the other day when I started looking at some of the acts that I haven't heard that I will see at the hangout festival this summer. Instead of going to their website or trying to listen to them on the radio I went to youtube. There I found a wealth of music with comments and reviews from everyday listeners like myself. I think this allows people to decide what songs are the best and give a great snapshot of an artist.
This is where the greatest hits idea comes from. Phish does not really have "greatest hits" albums, but everyone knows the best jams. Because I can get live shows from bands I have never heard of before I can get a sense of how the concert will be and what songs a band loves to play. I love the fact that I can look through setlists and decide what songs will likely be played and listen to them. If I like it than I'll try out some more of their music, if I don't like it so much than at least I gave it a try and I know that I actually listened to what the artist wants to say about themselves instead of what some industry exec whats me to think about the band.
Please do not interpret my post to be authorizing or endorsing 'pirating' or any other illegal activity. I just think a new music industry is emerging and I'm excited to see where it heads. For me, I'm gonna try and give bands the benefit of the doubt. When I listen to a new band I've never heard I'm gonna listen to the songs that the band wants people to hear and what other listeners think are their best songs. In this respect, a new 'greatest hits' designation takes form shaped by the band and user input. That excites me.
Wednesday, February 1, 2012
Long time, no see
Alright, its been a while since I've posted, I know. But I have a whole new set of interesting topics to discuss and I just got the mobile app for blogger so hopefully I will be more diligent. Discussions to follow.......
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)