Protecting Agricultural Water Rights
By: Doug Busselman, Executive Vice President
A couple of days ago someone offering a comment to our blog, urged Nevada Farm Bureau to play a bigger role in helping to protect rural water, especially from the threat of being taken to Las Vegas. In spite of the observation that was shared of the organization not be as actively involved as it should be, Farm Bureau has been involved in the process, seeking to find a way of implementing policy set by members on the subject.
Farm Bureau is a policy-driven organization directed by members on what issues to take action on and guided by that direction to achieve specified objectives.
Nevada Farm Bureau Policy on appropriation states, “Nevada Farm Bureau stands solidly behind rural county defense of the water resources within their boundaries and will support meaningful debate before any control or change is attempted.”
That policy prompted Nevada Farm Bureau to file 10 water protests dating back to the original filing for unappropriated water in three Northern counties by the Southern Nevada Water Authority. Two of those protests are still in the mix as the State Water Engineer prepares to conduct hearings in Snake Valley.
Farm Bureau policy also states our support for “prior appropriation of rights described in applicable decrees and permits.” In other words, Farm Bureau supports Nevada Water Law and the principles it is based on, including “First in Time – First in Right”. That principle is the basis for farmers and ranchers owning the bulk of water rights in the state.
Therein lies part of the challenge. The water rights sought by the Southern Nevada Water Authority was for water that no one else had applied for. They used and have followed state water law in their efforts to secure the water rights that they have been granted through the process that all go through to appropriate water.
The issue then goes to the next level of question; is there available water at the source? This is the basis for the hearings conducted by the State Engineer, determining how much water is available and identifying the water rights for those who were in possession of water rights prior to the water authority’s claim. This process serves as a protection for existing water rights, to the extent that you are confident in the way state water law is applied. The concept is that earlier rights will be unaffected by the withdrawn water, transported to Las Vegas. If and when the earlier rights might be impacted the water authority would be required to mitigate, going so far as to discontinue the magnitude of the withdrawals. (Of course that’s where most wonder whether they believe water law will be followed.)
Farm Bureau policy also maintains that every basin in the state should have a base-line inventory taken, identifying springs, streams and natural sub-irrigated meadows. Support for this concept was the reason for Nevada Farm Bureau’s support of AB 416 which gained passage in the 2009 Nevada Legislature.
This bill was sponsored by Assemblyman Pete Goicoechea of Eureka County and requires that in addition to other requirements of state law…"before approving an application for an interbasin transfer of more than 250 acre-feet of groundwater from a basin which the State Engineer has not previously inventoried or for which he has not conducted, or caused to be conducted, a study pursuant to NRS 532.165 or 533.368, the State Engineer or a person designated by the State Engineer shall conduct an inventory of the basin from which the water is to be exported. The inventory must include:
(a) The total amount of surface water and groundwater appropriated in accordance with a decreed, certified or permitted right;
(b) An estimate of the amount and location of all surface water and groundwater that is available for appropriation in the basin; and
(c) The name of each owner of record set forth in the records of the Office of the State Engineer for each decreed, certified or permitted right in the basin."'
This new law will not impact the decisions still to be made by the State Engineer for water rights applied for more than 18 years ago by the Southern Nevada Water Authority, but it does establish another level of protection that wasn’t available at that time.
Protection of water rights goes far beyond the measure of how many times your name might appear in the newspaper, especially when the support you hope to extend includes maintaining the foundation of law which your water rights are based on. Nevada water law doesn’t have an “except for us” clause, nor do we seek such an approach.
A couple of days ago someone offering a comment to our blog, urged Nevada Farm Bureau to play a bigger role in helping to protect rural water, especially from the threat of being taken to Las Vegas. In spite of the observation that was shared of the organization not be as actively involved as it should be, Farm Bureau has been involved in the process, seeking to find a way of implementing policy set by members on the subject.
Farm Bureau is a policy-driven organization directed by members on what issues to take action on and guided by that direction to achieve specified objectives.
Nevada Farm Bureau Policy on appropriation states, “Nevada Farm Bureau stands solidly behind rural county defense of the water resources within their boundaries and will support meaningful debate before any control or change is attempted.”
That policy prompted Nevada Farm Bureau to file 10 water protests dating back to the original filing for unappropriated water in three Northern counties by the Southern Nevada Water Authority. Two of those protests are still in the mix as the State Water Engineer prepares to conduct hearings in Snake Valley.
Farm Bureau policy also states our support for “prior appropriation of rights described in applicable decrees and permits.” In other words, Farm Bureau supports Nevada Water Law and the principles it is based on, including “First in Time – First in Right”. That principle is the basis for farmers and ranchers owning the bulk of water rights in the state.
Therein lies part of the challenge. The water rights sought by the Southern Nevada Water Authority was for water that no one else had applied for. They used and have followed state water law in their efforts to secure the water rights that they have been granted through the process that all go through to appropriate water.
The issue then goes to the next level of question; is there available water at the source? This is the basis for the hearings conducted by the State Engineer, determining how much water is available and identifying the water rights for those who were in possession of water rights prior to the water authority’s claim. This process serves as a protection for existing water rights, to the extent that you are confident in the way state water law is applied. The concept is that earlier rights will be unaffected by the withdrawn water, transported to Las Vegas. If and when the earlier rights might be impacted the water authority would be required to mitigate, going so far as to discontinue the magnitude of the withdrawals. (Of course that’s where most wonder whether they believe water law will be followed.)
Farm Bureau policy also maintains that every basin in the state should have a base-line inventory taken, identifying springs, streams and natural sub-irrigated meadows. Support for this concept was the reason for Nevada Farm Bureau’s support of AB 416 which gained passage in the 2009 Nevada Legislature.
This bill was sponsored by Assemblyman Pete Goicoechea of Eureka County and requires that in addition to other requirements of state law…"before approving an application for an interbasin transfer of more than 250 acre-feet of groundwater from a basin which the State Engineer has not previously inventoried or for which he has not conducted, or caused to be conducted, a study pursuant to NRS 532.165 or 533.368, the State Engineer or a person designated by the State Engineer shall conduct an inventory of the basin from which the water is to be exported. The inventory must include:
(a) The total amount of surface water and groundwater appropriated in accordance with a decreed, certified or permitted right;
(b) An estimate of the amount and location of all surface water and groundwater that is available for appropriation in the basin; and
(c) The name of each owner of record set forth in the records of the Office of the State Engineer for each decreed, certified or permitted right in the basin."'
This new law will not impact the decisions still to be made by the State Engineer for water rights applied for more than 18 years ago by the Southern Nevada Water Authority, but it does establish another level of protection that wasn’t available at that time.
Protection of water rights goes far beyond the measure of how many times your name might appear in the newspaper, especially when the support you hope to extend includes maintaining the foundation of law which your water rights are based on. Nevada water law doesn’t have an “except for us” clause, nor do we seek such an approach.
Posted by Doug Busselman at 6/6/2009 7:27 AM 
Categories: Water
Tags: Nevada Las Vegas Water Grab Agricultural Water Rights
Categories: Water
Tags: Nevada Las Vegas Water Grab Agricultural Water Rights
RIGHT ON DOUG!
You don't want that happening in this desert state.
Look what happened to Owens Valley in California, when L.A. sucked them dry...and without a renewable resource! Welcome to the desert.
Some of these sources are NOT renewable.
I worked in the IT Dept of the California Dept of Water Resources, believe it's BIG BUSINESS and it's all about trading water rights to support the growth of the big metropolitan areas swallowing up the state.
Do we really want to risk that happening here?
Public -- you need to wake up!
How about limiting GROWTH to what the planet can sustain?
Barb
SaveRNVanimals.org
Reply to this