Is A Water War Brewing Out West?

All Things Considered:

In Clifton, Kan., on the short end of the river, farmer Mark Taddiken is worried about having a short supply of water. He wears heavy canvas overalls on a cold, gray morning as he stands in his field with black cattle chewing yellow cornstalks. He's measuring the charge of the electric fence that keeps the cattle from roaming away.
Like the nearby Republican River, the fence isn't worth much if there's no current.
Three-quarters of Taddiken's farmland in north-central Kansas is irrigated with center pivots — tall sprinkler systems that irrigate in circles in fields of corn and soybeans. If the river stays low, like it is now, Kansas law limits Taddiken to a third of his normal irrigation plan, limiting what he can grow. He estimates he could lose $500 per acre from reduced yields.
"We're standing out here under this pivot right now that covers 120 acres," he says. "That restriction on that one well alone would be around $60,000."
Multiply Taddiken's loss up and down the river and you can see just how important water is here. Irrigated fields raise more valuable crops. Local businesses sell more seed and fertilizer. The price of land goes up. Take water away, and that's all reversed.
Kansas officials say farmers upstream in Nebraska are pumping too much river water, leaving less for farmers like Taddiken.
David Aiken studies water policy at the University of Nebraska, Lincoln. He says Nebraska did indeed use more than its share of water during a period of drought in the mid-2000s.
"In the past, Kansas has not gotten the water that it was entitled to in those dry years," Aiken says. "and that's one of the reasons that Kansas and Nebraska are back in court."
The question for the Supreme Court is how to keep thirsty Nebraska farmers in check. Kansas wants the court to order Nebraska to ban irrigation on thousands of acres of farmland.
While that may sound reasonable on the Kansas side of the border, in Nebraska it's viewed as draconian.
Jasper Fanning, manager of the Upper Republican Natural Resources District in southwestern Nebraska, says that plan, which he calls a "just shut it down" approach, doesn't make sense.

Expect a lot more stories like this.  Maybe I'm wrong, but I'll be surprised if large scale agriculture west of the 98th meridian lasts through my lifetime.  I wouldn't be surprised if the Texas Panhandle and southwestern Kansas hit the wall in the next 20 years.  Actually, that could very well be through my lifetime, considering the age I'm getting.  And the "healthy" lifestyle I'm living.  Dust Bowl 2.0 is something we could do without.