LINCOLN, Neb. (DTN) -- The loss of irrigation water has been devastating for Idaho farmers Jerry and Valerie Bingham.

The Binghams have only been allowed to pump groundwater for irrigation on their 1,000-acre farm near Blackfoot in southeast Idaho once since 2025 -- in April 2026.

In July 2025, the state of Idaho issued a curtailment order, leaving the family, which holds senior water rights dating back to 1950, without water. Meanwhile, junior water rights holders have been allowed to irrigate.

"Farming is how our family has made a living for generations, and losing access to our water has put that way of life at risk," the Binghams said in a statement to DTN.

"Without water, our soil has dried out, crops have failed and we've had to leave land unplanted. It's difficult to watch the farm struggle when we know we have the water rights we've relied on for decades."

In Idaho, state law establishes a priority system for water rights, allowing senior users with longer-standing claims to access water before junior users and requiring the government to impose limits on junior users before senior users.

Now, the Binghams have taken the state of Idaho to court.

In a complaint filed this week in the District Court for the Seventh Judicial District in Bingham County, the family is seeking monetary compensation, arguing the curtailment is an unconstitutional taking of their property.

Under Idaho's prior-appropriation doctrine, "first in time is first in right," the Binghams argue the Idaho Department of Water Resources violated that principle when it allowed junior water right holders to pump water.

Junior water right holders have been allowed to pump groundwater because they agreed to state-mandated mitigation plans, according to the lawsuit.

DAMAGES CLAIMED

The Binghams allege in their complaint that they lost about $300,000 in revenue related to lost potato production because the family was unable to plant on its farm.

Instead, they had to rent land to plant.

The lawsuit seeks about $388,000 in lost wheat revenue caused by what they say has been inadequate irrigation water.

The family told the court that they face possible loan defaults and potential bankruptcy as a result.

The Idaho Department of Water Resources began administering curtailment orders and mitigation plans under the state's conjunctive management system, beginning in 2005.

Senior surface-water users in the Eastern Snake River basin filed a call in 2005 and alleged that groundwater pumping by junior rights holders was dwindling water supplies they were entitled to receive.

In their lawsuit, the Binghams claim their groundwater rights were largely insulated from curtailment because they have relatively senior groundwater rights dating back to 1950.

For the better part of 20 years, the Binghams did not face curtailment.

According to that conjunctive management system, surface water and groundwater are treated as connected resources. So, if pumping groundwater is determined to be cutting water available to senior surface-water rights holders, the state can order groundwater users to reduce or stop pumping, unless they're able to offset water use through mitigation.

In all, the Snake River basin is home to more than 30,000 farms, according to the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation.

CHANGE IN PREVIOUS APPROACH

In their lawsuit, the Binghams said that before 2025, state efforts to curtail water use targeted groundwater rights that were junior to their rights.

On July 25, 2025, the state issued a curtailment order that required "all groundwater users with water-right priority after Oct. 11, 1900, to completely curtail groundwater pumping unless they agreed to operate under a department-approved mitigation plan or joined a water district with an approved mitigation plan."

Because the Binghams' rights date back to 1950 to 1952, they fall within the state's curtailment order, although they have some of the more senior rights in the basin.

Since the July 2025 order, the state has issued six additional curtailment orders -- Sept. 11, 2025; Nov. 21, 2025; Dec. 8, 2025; May 14, 2026; June 17, 2026; and July 21, 2026 -- all of which the lawsuit argues have deprived the family of its property rights.

The Binghams have six water rights, one dating back to 1950, two from 1951, two from 1952 and one from 1987, according to the lawsuit.

STATE METHODOLOGY

The state of Idaho uses a methodology that predicts injury to senior surface-water users during a particular irrigation season, in this instance dating back to 1900 water rights.

In 2025, the state concluded that the Twin Falls Canal Company would suffer a predicted in-season demand shortfall of about 75,300 acre-feet, according to information from the state.

The delivery call brought by the Surface Water Coalition includes some of the oldest and most senior surface rights in the basin. That includes A&B Irrigation District, American Falls Reservoir District No. 2, Burley Irrigation District, Milner Irrigation District, Minidoka Irrigation District, North Side Canal Company and Twin Falls.

In determining injury, the state evaluates surface-water supplies, aquifer conditions, irrigation demand, river forecasts, groundwater model results and expected effects of groundwater pumping on senior surface-water users.

"The fundamental principle of Western water law is 'first in time, first in right,'" said Damien Schiff, an attorney with Pacific Legal Foundation, who is representing the Binghams. "That means the government must either respect the Binghams' senior water rights or pay them for its refusal to do so. Their lawsuit seeks a return to the lawful, predictable framework Idaho farmers need to steward resources, grow food and plan for the future."

The Idaho Attorney General's Office did not respond to DTN's request for comment by publication time.

MITIGATION PROPOSALS REJECTED

Along the way, the Binghams have filed five proposed water mitigation strategies with the state, and none of them have been accepted, according to the family's lawsuit.

Prior to filing the complaint, the Binghams filed a motion to stay enforcement of the state's curtailment on Sept. 15, 2026, saying the state's action already has resulted in "substantial financial losses" to the family.

"But without a stay of the continuing curtailment, the impact on the Binghams could be catastrophic," according to a memorandum filed with the court.

"The importance of a stay is relevant as well to overall farm business concerns. For example, federal crop insurance is generally unavailable for crops planted when water is curtailed; and without the availability of crop insurance, planting a crop would be reckless. Further, water availability now affects the Binghams' ability to obtain a contract for

potatoes; without assured water, it's unlikely that the Binghams will be able to obtain a contract, which in turn will lead to a substantial reduction in their anticipated revenue."

As it stands now, the Binghams say they are unsure how long the farm can continue.

"The uncertainty has affected our whole family because we don't know what next year will look like or whether we'll be able to keep farming," the Binghams told DTN.

"We just want to get back to what we've always done: farming our land and passing it on to the next generation."

Todd Neeley can be reached at todd.neeley@dtn.com

Follow him on social platform X @DTNeeley

(c) Copyright 2026 DTN, LLC. All rights reserved.