Escalante Valley Water Users Assn.

1
Escalante Valley Water Users Assn.The Ground
Water Management Plan

• November 9, 2011

2
Escalante Valley Water Users Assn. Who is the
(EVW)

• Formed by the irrigation water users in the EV
• Governed by a 9 member Board of Directors
• Mike Brown, Bob Holt, Howard Bracken, Steve
  Jones, Marlo Reber, Cody Staheli, Brad Bowler,
  Lee Bracken LaDel Laub
• Annual meetings have been held since 2004
• Many meetings with previous and current State
  Eng.
• Web Page created to keep the public informed
• http//evwua.org

3
Escalante Valley Water Users Assn. Activity
History

• 2003 -Collected assessments from water users.
• 2004 -Retained Dee Hansen to lobby the
  legislature
• 2005 - Debated with the legislative task force
• 2006 - Provided valuable input to ground water
  law
• 2007 - Tracked the State Engineers Activities
• 2008 - Negotiating with the State Engineer
• 2009 - Lobby local legislators funding
  moratorium
• 2010 - Develop relations with new State Engineer
• 2011 - Negotiate the frame work for new plan

4
Ground Water Management History

• 2006 - The legislature passed the Safe Yield
  law
• 2007- The State Engineer began the process in
  Beryl
• 2009 - Legislature passed a Moratorium on
  funding
• 2009 - New State Engineer was hired - Kent Jones
• 2010 The legislature passed the Local District
  law
• 2011 The new State Engineer requested that
  water users proactively engage in the
  process

5
Key Water Legislation Language

• The State Engineer may develop a ground water
  management plan to achieve safe yield and
  shall consider economic impacts and allow
  gradual implementation.
• A ground water management plan can include
  voluntary arrangements by the local users.
• The law requires a public process with input
  from the users and others
• Statute 75-5-15 section 4, b and c

6
Conservation cropping will be allowed to meet
the reductions
Adaptive Management Review Period
7
Estimated water table levels from Dee Hansen
study
8
State Engineer Default Process

• The State Engineer absent a voluntary arrangement
  by law must cut by priority date.
• Projected cuts are on the State website
• http//waterrights.utah.gov
• Copies are in the back of the room in binders

9
Voluntary Arrangement

• Pooling of water rights to collectively achieve
  the necessary water use reductions.
• The forming of a local water district to manage
  the ground water management plan and facilitate
  funding requirements for economic stabilization
• Create a buy back option and seek 0 percent loan
  funding from the State so that water rights can
  be purchased when they become available and held
  by the district to achieve necessary reductions.

10
Options to be Considered Municipal Culinary
Water Rights

• One option to consider is to protect existing
  municipal and culinary water rights.
• Municipal/culinary water rights are at risk.
• Irrigation users could absorb the reductions.
• Municipal and culinary water right owners could
  participate in the funding of the reductions.
• full use of water right for financial
  participation

11
Local Water District Facts

• Facilitates voluntary arrangement
• Culinary solution
• Conservation credits
• Local control not like a special service
  district
• Created voluntarily by action of those affected
• Self Governance - Board representative of water
  users interests
• Voting by water right not land ownership
• Ability to bond/borrow, enter into agreements
  receive grants
• Allows for protection of water right interests
  -legal water banking
• Ability authority to tax as needed
• Minimal administrative costs to create operate

12
Where Do We Go?

• We need a water management plan that meets the
  objectives of the water law statue and protects
  the economic interests of the water users, the
  local community and State.
• The committee has negotiated with the State
  Engineer to develop a plan that creates a
  win-win solution.
• A voluntary plan requires the use of a local
  water district to facilitate the administrative
  and financial objectives.
• Water users should have a vested interest in
  protecting the underground water resources and
  agree that the do nothing approach is not a
  viable answer.