Wichita spent years preparing for the construction of Cheney Reservoir to augment its supply, but no sooner had that been completed than eyes began turning toward the future. On June 30, 1965, Eldon Means of Means Laboratory, Inc., a local analytical and consulting laboratory, said that although Wichita had a sufficient quantity of water, eventually the city would need more. Therefore, he suggested that the city build a desalinization plant to test the feasibility of removing solid materials and salt from the Arkansas River. Means told the Flood Control and Water Resources Committee of the Wichita Chamber of Commerce that a pilot plant would cost $30,000 to $40,000, and could pave the way for utilizing the water available to Wichita. The committee recommended that the Water Department consider the plans. Although the cost was considered too high and no action was taken, the concept has remained as an alternative for the future. During the numerous water controversies in Wichita, the majority of the alternatives have been heard before. The immediacy of the need and the comparison of costs are often the determining factors in making the difficult choice, and the political struggles between federal, state, and local interests provide the final compromises for the selected solutions.

Even while Cheney was being built, planning was done for future expansion. According to Director of Water Robert Hess in 1966, because of the time from a project's conception to its completion, it was necessary for the city to plan ahead. "There is no such thing as' today's supply' in the water business. Ten years from now is today," he said. (Eagle, 8/14/66).

Hess reported five alternative supplies were under study by the Water Department, which included: 1) directing Rattlesnake Creek to the North Fork of the Ninnescah River, feeding Cheney Reservoir; 2) recharging the Equus Beds through soil conservation and control; 3) building dams along the Little Arkansas River to hold water in storage until needed; 4) channelling water from the Big Arkansas River around the salt problems near Hutchinson; and 5) a reservoir on the South Fork of the Ninnescah River, which the Bureau of Reclamation had already included in its initial research. Use of the plans could be 20 to 50 years in the future, depending on demands. The announcement of the studies came during August 14-20, 1966, at the first Willing Water Week, an event sponsored by the American Water Works Association to pay tribute to water and water workers.

By the late 1960's, concerns were raised about future water shortages in south central Kansas. In December, 1968, Keith Krause, executive director of the Kansas Water Resources Board, told the Kansas Economic Development Commission that water shortages could become noticeable in that area within 15 years, while in western Kansas ground water might be depleted within 50 years.

Population and industrial growth, along with the increased use of irrigation for farming, would continue to deplete the normal water supplies, while intensifying the severity of the periodic droughts in the state.

As long as Kansas maintained widespread research into conservation and use of water, the water shortage could be avoided. According to Krause, Kansas was in the forefront in developing water resources, and, "It must stay that way." (Eagle, 12/18/68). Work included research on recharging underground water sources, for which the legislature had appropriated $30,000 the year before, and for which the U.S. Geological Survey was contributing time and money. Another are a involved research on stopping the loss of water from evaporation and transpiration. Krause said 98 percent of the rain in western Kansas was lost as a result of