Each year, the United States Geological Survey (USGS) publishes a report on groundwater conditions in Utah. The report is prepared and published in cooperation with the Utah Division of Water Resources, the Utah Division of Water Rights, and the Utah Division of Water Quality. The report is a valuable resource containing information on well construction, groundwater withdrawal, groundwater level changes, groundwater quality, and much more.
The 2010 report is available online and can be accessed by clicking here.
Sunday, November 28, 2010
Saturday, November 27, 2010
What is an ELU?
Records of the Utah Division of Water Rights often utilize the term “ELU.” This abbreviation stands for Equivalent Livestock Unit, which is a standardized measure related to the watering of various sized livestock. For example, 1 ELU could represent 1 large animal, such as a cow or horse; 5 medium-sized animals, such as sheep or goats; or 33.33 small animals, such as chickens or turkeys. Accordingly, if you have a water right that allows for stockwatering of 50 ELUs, you would have enough water for 50 cows, or 250 sheep, or 1,666 chickens (or a combination of animals, such as 40 cows and 50 sheep).
Tuesday, November 23, 2010
What Are Supplemental Groups and Sole Supply?
Generally, each water right in Utah is limited to a defined quantity for a defined use. Sometimes, however, multiple water rights are used together for one particular use. For example, three water rights may be jointly used to irrigate ten acres of land, or ten water rights may be jointly used to provide water for 200 head of cattle. In such cases, the water rights are said to be "supplemental" to each and are listed together in a “supplemental group.”
The water rights in the supplemental group are usually not assigned an individual limit, which is not an issue if the same person owns all of the water rights in the supplemental group and continues to use the group for the specified use. However, when some of the water rights in the supplemental group are sold to different people and/or an owner wants to file a change application on some of the water rights in the supplemental group, a determination has to be made regarding how much of the group total is to be apportioned to each water right in the group. This is what is referred to as “sole supply.” For example, if ten water rights are in a supplemental group that provides water for 200 head of cattle, each of the ten water rights could be apportioned a sole supply of 20 head of cattle. Alternatively, five of the water rights could be apportioned a sole supply of 40 head of cattle each, and the other five water rights could be apportioned a sole supply of 0 head of cattle each. The Division of Water Rights essentially allow the water right owner(s) to apportion the sole supply in any way they want, as long as the sum of the water rights does not exceed the group total and the allocation is consistent with the governing water right documents.
The Utah Division of Water Rights has recently issued Utah Administrative Rule R655-16 regarding supplemental groups and sole supply. The Rule provides that in order to allocate sole supply among the water rights in a supplemental group, all of the water right owners in the group must sign a Declaration of Beneficial Use (formerly called a Group Contribution Statement). If a water right owner has exhausted all reasonable efforts and has been unable to locate or get signatures from all of the other water right owners, the owner may ask the Division of Water Rights to initiate an informal proceeding to allocate the sole supply. To read more about Rule R655-16, click here.
The water rights in the supplemental group are usually not assigned an individual limit, which is not an issue if the same person owns all of the water rights in the supplemental group and continues to use the group for the specified use. However, when some of the water rights in the supplemental group are sold to different people and/or an owner wants to file a change application on some of the water rights in the supplemental group, a determination has to be made regarding how much of the group total is to be apportioned to each water right in the group. This is what is referred to as “sole supply.” For example, if ten water rights are in a supplemental group that provides water for 200 head of cattle, each of the ten water rights could be apportioned a sole supply of 20 head of cattle. Alternatively, five of the water rights could be apportioned a sole supply of 40 head of cattle each, and the other five water rights could be apportioned a sole supply of 0 head of cattle each. The Division of Water Rights essentially allow the water right owner(s) to apportion the sole supply in any way they want, as long as the sum of the water rights does not exceed the group total and the allocation is consistent with the governing water right documents.
The Utah Division of Water Rights has recently issued Utah Administrative Rule R655-16 regarding supplemental groups and sole supply. The Rule provides that in order to allocate sole supply among the water rights in a supplemental group, all of the water right owners in the group must sign a Declaration of Beneficial Use (formerly called a Group Contribution Statement). If a water right owner has exhausted all reasonable efforts and has been unable to locate or get signatures from all of the other water right owners, the owner may ask the Division of Water Rights to initiate an informal proceeding to allocate the sole supply. To read more about Rule R655-16, click here.
Saturday, November 20, 2010
Utah Stream Access Coalition v. Victory Ranch
On November 12, 2010, a lawsuit was filed in the Wasatch County district court challenging the 2010 stream access law passed by the Utah Legislature (aka, the "Recreational Use of Public Water on Private Property Act," House Bill 141, or H.B. 141). The lawsuit was filed by Utah Stream Access Coalition, and names Victory Ranch L.C., Silver Creek - Robert Larsen Investors LLC, Utah Division of Wildlife Resources, and Wasatch County Sheriff Todd Bonner as defendants.
The complaint alleges that the Act violates Article I, section 25; Article XVII, and Article XX of the Utah Constitution and the Public Trust doctrine "to the extent it purports to abrogate or relinquish, to the enrichment of private landowners, the public easement, right-of-way and servitude to lawfully access and use Utah's public water and related public resources for recreational and other lawful purposes . . . and to reasonably touch and use the bed of such waters when doing so, as recognized in [Conatser v. Johnson] and other Utah Supreme Court decisions."
The complaint also alleges that the Act violates Article I, section 23; Article V; Article VI; and Article VIII of the Utah Constitution and the separation of powers doctrine "to the extent that it purports to (a) adjudicate the constitutional rights of the Coalition's members and defendants, (b) declare that Conatser's recognition of public rights constitutes a taking of private property, and (c) abrogate or relinquish, to the enrichment of private landowners, the public easement, right-of-way and servitude to lawfully access and use Utah's public waters and related public resources for recreational and other lawful purposes . . . and to reasonably touch and use the bed of such waters when doing so, as recognized in Conatser and other Utah Supreme Court decisions."
The Coalition is asking the court for a judgment (1) declaring that the Act violates the Utah Constitution, the public trust doctrine, and the separation of powers doctrine; (2) declaring that the public has an easement for recreational access across private beds, including those on the Victory Ranch and Larsen properties; (3) enjoining Victory Ranch and Larsen from prohibiting, impeding, or restricting public access across private beds on their properties; and (4) enjoining the Division of Wildlife Resources and the Wasatch County Sheriff from citing members of the public for criminal trespass for accessing private beds on the Victory Ranch and Larsen properties.
I have a copy of the Coalition's complaint that was filed with the court. I would be happy to email a copy to anyone who is interested. Click here for my email address.
Update: The Coalition has filed an Amended Complaint. Click here to read more.
The complaint alleges that the Act violates Article I, section 25; Article XVII, and Article XX of the Utah Constitution and the Public Trust doctrine "to the extent it purports to abrogate or relinquish, to the enrichment of private landowners, the public easement, right-of-way and servitude to lawfully access and use Utah's public water and related public resources for recreational and other lawful purposes . . . and to reasonably touch and use the bed of such waters when doing so, as recognized in [Conatser v. Johnson] and other Utah Supreme Court decisions."
The complaint also alleges that the Act violates Article I, section 23; Article V; Article VI; and Article VIII of the Utah Constitution and the separation of powers doctrine "to the extent that it purports to (a) adjudicate the constitutional rights of the Coalition's members and defendants, (b) declare that Conatser's recognition of public rights constitutes a taking of private property, and (c) abrogate or relinquish, to the enrichment of private landowners, the public easement, right-of-way and servitude to lawfully access and use Utah's public waters and related public resources for recreational and other lawful purposes . . . and to reasonably touch and use the bed of such waters when doing so, as recognized in Conatser and other Utah Supreme Court decisions."
The Coalition is asking the court for a judgment (1) declaring that the Act violates the Utah Constitution, the public trust doctrine, and the separation of powers doctrine; (2) declaring that the public has an easement for recreational access across private beds, including those on the Victory Ranch and Larsen properties; (3) enjoining Victory Ranch and Larsen from prohibiting, impeding, or restricting public access across private beds on their properties; and (4) enjoining the Division of Wildlife Resources and the Wasatch County Sheriff from citing members of the public for criminal trespass for accessing private beds on the Victory Ranch and Larsen properties.
I have a copy of the Coalition's complaint that was filed with the court. I would be happy to email a copy to anyone who is interested. Click here for my email address.
Update: The Coalition has filed an Amended Complaint. Click here to read more.
Thursday, November 4, 2010
Utah Waterways Task Force Meeting in Salt Lake City
The Utah Waterways Task Force has scheduled its fourth meeting for Thursday, November 18, 2010 at 11:00 am. The meeting will be held in Room 250 of the State Capitol.
To view the meeting notice and other information about the Task Force, click here.
To view the meeting notice and other information about the Task Force, click here.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)