Ridenbaugh Press/Water Rights

Leaders of the Florida Department of Environmental Protection, the South Florida Water Management District and the Florida Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services on November 29 marked the expansion of an innovative, cost-saving land management strategy with the signing of partnership agreements with eight Florida ranchers. Water managers are collaborating with landowners to achieve water storage, water quality and habitat improvement benefits north of Lake Okeechobee but at less cost than traditional government land acquisition programs.

DEP Secretary Herschel T. Vinyard Jr. and SFWMD Executive Director Melissa Meekermet with landowners at the Dixie Cattle Ranch in Okeechobee County to finalize the new agreements that will store 4,800-acre feet of water on private lands and improve water quality in Lake Okeechobee, the coastal estuaries and the Everglades. The ranchlands — totaling 9,500 acres across three counties — have become part of the SFWMD’s Dispersed Water Management Program to store water on public, private and tribal lands. The program is an important new tool that is helping to improve water quality, protect water resources and conserve Florida’s habitats. At the same time, using working ranchlands to achieve environmental benefits also helps sustain jobs, keeps land on local tax rolls and avoids burdening taxpayers with new debt to buy title to the land. The effort parallels the water resource goals of Florida’s successful land acquisition programs without the higher cost of buying and managing land.

“Getting the water right is central to every aspect of Florida life and its future,” said DEP Secretary Herschel T. Vinyard Jr.

“Collaborating with property owners to store excess water helps advance the conservation and natural resource protection goals of highly successful environmental protection programs, without the high cost of land acquisition, the burden of ongoing debt payments and leaving landowners to do what they do best — manage the land and support our economy.”

Since the start of its Dispersed Water Management Program in 2005, the District has collaborated with a coalition of agencies, environmental organizations, ranchers and researchers to utilize approximately 229,000 acres of land for water storage, water quality improvement and habitat enhancement. In addition to employing regional public projects, the program encourages property owners to retain water on their land rather than drain it and to accept and detain regional runoff.

“The future of water storage north of Lake Okeechobee relies on innovative partnerships and marks a milestone in our collective efforts to preserve both the Northern Everglades and our working landscapes for future generations,” said Florida Commissioner of Agriculture Adam Putnam. “This program is a progressive way of achieving our shared goals of environmental restoration and a healthy and sustainable agricultural economy.”

Based on data and experience gained from eight original pilot projects, the District in October doubled participation in the program with the approval of eight new contracts, spanning Okeechobee, Polk and Highlands counties. Together, projects on the newly enrolled lands will provide 4,800 acre-feet of regional storage and additional nutrient benefits. One of the pilot projects used to develop the Dispersed Water Management Program was shown in a single year to have removed 8.4 metric tons of phosphorus to improve water quality in the Lake Okeechobee Watershed. The District is investing $7million over 10 years for the latest contracts. A total of $46 million has been designated over the next five years to help further achieve program goals.

The annual meeting of the Arkansas River Compact Administration will take place at 8:30 a.m. MST (9:30 a.m. CST), on Thursday, Dec. 8, in the Lamar Community Building, 610 S. Sixth St., Lamar, Colo.

The Arkansas River Compact Administration administers provisions of the Kansas-Colorado Arkansas River Compact, including the operation of John Martin Reservoir. Topics to be covered at the annual meeting include a review of John Martin Reservoir operations, compliance update, committee reports, and updates from state and federal agencies.

The full meeting agenda is posted on the Kansas Department of Agriculture’s website at http://www.ksda.gov/interstate_water_issues/content/143.

The Kansas-Colorado Arkansas River Compact was negotiated in 1948 between Kansas and Colorado with participation by the federal government. Its stated purposes are to settle existing disputes and remove causes of future controversy between Colorado and Kansas over Arkansas River water and to equitably divide and apportion the water between Colorado and Kansas, including benefits arising from John Martin Reservoir.

Kansas has three representatives on the Administration. They are David Barfield, chief engineer of the Kansas Department of Agriculture’s Division of Water Resources, David Brenn of Garden City, and Randy Hayzlett of Lakin.

The Administration’s engineering, operations, and administrative and legal committees will meet starting at 1:30 p.m. MST (2:30 pm CST) on Wednesday, Dec. 7. Those meetings will also take place at the Lamar Community Building.

In an effort to protect jobs and private water rights at Powderhorn and other ski areas, Representative Scott Tipton (R-CO) on November 29 urged U.S. Forest Service Chief Tom Tidwell to return to the use of the 2004 water clause and allow for adjustments moving forward.

Earlier this month, Tipton participated in a Natural Resources Subcommittee on National Parks, Forests and Public Lands oversight hearing on “Forest Service Regulatory Roadblocks to Productive Land Use and Recreation: Proposed Planning Rule, Special-use Permits, and Travel Management.” This hearing further examined the Forest Service’s proposal which could threaten deference to state water law and infringe upon private property rights.

It was brought to light during the hearing that the Forest Service is already enforcing the permit requirement despite the fact that it has yet to be officially implemented. Glenn Porzak, of the National Ski Areas Association, told the committee that the Forest Service required the developers of the Powderhorn ski area (just outside of Grand Junction) to agree to the terms of the permit requirement regardless of future Congressional or court action on it.

During the hearing, Porzack explained the significance of privately held water rights to local communities: “Water rights are important to Colorado and many businesses depend on them as collateral to get loans, expand, and create jobs. This permit requirement is wrong and has no legal legs to stand on.”

Tipton wrote in the letter to Tidwell:

You expressed that there was urgency to finalize the interim directive so that the Powderhorn ski area which had recently changed hands would be able to reissue their permit under the new conditions. The new water clause would revive old water clauses and make Powderhorn subject to the requirements of the permits of previous holders which are decades old. Powderhorn and other resorts held to the new permit conditions entered into their special use permits with no notice that they would be subject to the requirements of previous holders’ permits and were not given a chance to negotiate those terms. This process is not even handed and could result in a loss of financing for maintenance and development as well as subsequent job losses.

Powderhorn ski area was forced to sign the special use permit in order to be allowed to move forward with preparations for the ski area opening. It was also forced by the Forest Service to sign a letter acknowledging that it was not reserving any rights regarding the validity of the permit or conditioning its acceptance of the permit conditions, including those that require the relinquishment of water rights. As the Powderhorn ski area faces the implementation of their special use permit, I urge the Forest Service to return to the use of the 2004 water clause and allow for adjustments moving forward based on an agreement between the permit holder and the Forest Service to reflect final language in the clause following further collaboration.

Tipton closed by calling for cooperation from the Forest Service, writing, “Powderhorn is poised to begin its season and help provide much needed jobs to the area and stimulate the local economy. It is critical that they have a willing partner in the Forest Service moving forward to accomplish these goals.”

The Center for Biological Diversity on November 29 submitted more than 21,200 comments from the public to the Nevada state engineer opposing granting of water rights to the Southern Nevada Water Authority for its massive groundwater pipeline project. If approved, the project would siphon 57 million gallons of water a year away from rural Nevada and Utah to fuel unsustainable urban growth in southern Nevada, unleashing vast environmental, economic and social harm.

The Center will also submit the comments to the Water Authority’s board of directors at their meeting on Wednesday.

“Aside from being a financial boondoggle, the Water Authority’s proposed pipeline would destroy Nevada’s priceless natural heritage and huge swaths of rural communities,” said Rob Mrowka, a Nevada-based ecologist with the Center. “There are other, better options for addressing southern Nevada’s long-term water needs.”

A fiscal analysis produced by Las Vegas-based Hobbs, Ong & Associates conservatively pegged the cost of the water project at nearly $15.5 billion — which would saddle millions of ratepayers in Clark County with huge costs for water services for generations. The Water Authority has said publicly that the cost for the project, which would initially include more than 300 miles of pipelines and dozens of well sites in rural east-central Nevada, is $2 billion to $3.6 billion. Under the $15.5 billion estimate, average monthly water bills for residents would increase from $36 to more than $90.

A draft “environmental impact statement” prepared by the Bureau of Land Management for the pipeline project disclosed that major vegetation and ecosystem changes would occur on more than 200,000 acres, including wetlands that will dry up and wildlife shrubland habitat converted to dryland grasses and noxious weeds. More than 300 springs would also be damaged, along with more than 120 miles of streams. Species such as the Bonneville cutthroat trout, sage grouse, mule deer and elk would suffer major declines as their habitats disappear.

“It doesn’t make sense to rob Nevada’s wildlife and these rural areas of the water they need just to quench the thirst of unsustainable growth, whether it’s Las Vegas or Coyote Springs,” said Mrowka. “It’s time for our county and municipal leaders to start talking about creating sustainable communities in the face of dwindling water supplies and a hotter, drier climate. Clearly the old paradigm of a growth-driven economy has failed and will not lead to a promising future.”

Among the options not seriously studied by the Water Authority are aggressive conservation; investment in modern and efficient indoor and outdoor water appliances and devices; expanded development of ocean desalinization; reworking the sorely outdated laws governing the Colorado River’s water; and the Authority’s own general manager’s suggestion of diversion of the flood waters of the Mississippi. The Water Authority has never produced an analysis comparing the costs, benefits and risks of the various alternatives, but instead has single-mindedly pursued the groundwater-mining solution.

The Bureau of Reclamation is announcing the initiation of Phase 4 of the Colorado River Basin Water Supply and Demand Study: Development and Evaluation of Opportunities for Balancing Water Supply and Demand. The Colorado River Basin (Basin) Study was initiated by Reclamation as part of the Department of the Interior’s WaterSMART program under the 2009 SECURE Water Act (P.L. 111-11).
With Phase 4 of the Study, the team is seeking a broad range of options to help resolve future water supply and demand imbalances in the Colorado River. The team will explore the effectiveness of various options and groupings of options, referred to as strategies, for helping resolve projected future imbalances. The performance of options and strategies will be evaluated over time and across the combination of water supply and demand scenarios. Due to the scale of the Basin, the magnitude and timing of projected imbalances, and the broad needs of the Basin resources being considered, a wide variety of options will likely be explored, including conservation and reuse, development of local groundwater supplies, augmentation, water transfers, and operational efficiencies.

The reports and analysis in the Study will better define options for future water management of the Colorado River Basin where climate change, record drought, population increases and environmental needs have heightened competition for scarce water supplies. Based on preliminary assessments, large supply-demand imbalances greater than 3.5 million acre-feet (maf) are plausible over the next 50 years when considering a water supply scenario that incorporates changes in climate. Work is ongoing to explore alternative combinations of supply and demand that could result in a range of imbalances both greater and less than 3.5 maf.

“Those who best understand the dynamics of the Colorado River are the people who can bring the most to the table in gathering ideas and insight on the potential future management of the basin,” Commissioner Michael L. Connor said today. “Phase 4 of this basin study invites a broad discussion on ideas that can help identify how future water managers will address imbalances between supply and demand along the Colorado. Reclamation, the seven Colorado River Basin States and our many partners throughout the basin have much to learn from this study to guide future management, so it is critical that we provide this forum to gather a wide array of public input.”

Reclamation is considering the needs of the Basin resources that are dependent upon a healthy river system, including water for municipal, industrial and agricultural use, hydroelectric power generation, recreation, fish and wildlife and water dependent ecological systems, under a broad range of conditions that could occur over the next 50 years.

“Bringing in many perspectives is critical to the success of the Study,” said Co-Study Manager for Reclamation Carly Jerla. “We are seeking input from a wide range of stakeholders and interested parties from within and outside of the Basin to help identify a broad range of ideas because no single option will be adequate to meet all of the future needs of Basin resources,” Jerla added.

Due to the inherent complexities of the Study and the many diverse interests and perspectives, new information will be distributed in the form of technical updates. The updates will be published to reflect continuous technical developments and the ongoing input of stakeholders. Interim Report No. 1 was published in June 2011 and technical updates to the reports included in Interim Report No. 1 will be published in January 2012, with additional technical updates in spring 2012. The Study is targeted for completion in July 2012.

Additional information on the Study including preliminary information on future supply and demand projected imbalances, the process for submitting ideas, and information on how to join a webinar about the Study, can be found online at: www.usbr.gov/lc/region/programs/crbstudy.html.

Secretary of the Interior Ken Salazar on November 29 announced $21 million in federal funding under the Soboba of Luiseño Indians Settlement Act, marking the final step in an historic water rights settlement and fulfilling promises made to the Soboba Band and southern California communities when the Act was approved by Congress in 2008. The implementation of the settlement is expected to stabilize water supplies in the region and enhance economic development opportunities for the Band and its neighboring communities.

“Today we bring to a close more than 150 years of conflict and decades of litigation between the Soboba Band and neighboring communities over the San Jacinto River Basin’s limited water resources,” said Secretary Salazar. “Thanks to collaboration among the Band, the water districts and the U.S. government, the funds we are releasing today will have a real, lasting impact when it comes to a secure water supply and spurring economic development for the Soboba nation and the neighboring communities.”

Disputes and litigation over the water resources date back to the late 1800’s with multiple non-Indian water diversion from the San Jacinto River and the construction into the 1930’s of the San Jacinto tunnel, a component of the Colorado River Aqueduct that transports water from the Colorado River to southern California. Years of growth in the region – which now serves over 18.5 million Californians – drastically affected groundwater supplies relied upon both by Band and the local communities of Hemet and San Jacinto.

The water rights settlement resolves longstanding disputes by providing the Soboba Band with quantified water rights and assurances of water supplies for its 6,000-acre reservation, as well as establishes a framework for regional water management that will help to restore groundwater levels and prevent ongoing overdrafts of this important basin.

Publication of yesterday’s Federal Register notice releases more than $11 million to cover the Band’s costs for important water and sewer infrastructure on its reservation.

The action also makes $10 million held in the San Jacinto Basin Restoration Fund available to two neighboring water districts – Lake Hemet Municipal Water District and Eastern Municipal Water District – for a groundwater restoration and recharge project. The Metropolitan Water District of Southern California, which is also a party to the settlement, will provide much of the water needed for the project, a total of 7,500 acre-feet of imported water each year until at least 2035. The provisions for recharge of the San Jacinto River Basin aquifer, which could not have been achieved through litigation, will also enable the development of thousands of acres of residential and commercial land.

“This funding gets a fair resolution on Indian water rights over the finish line,” said Deputy Secretary David J. Hayes. “Water is the lifeblood of our communities, and I’m pleased that we can now begin a new chapter on water in this region – one marked by certainty, restoration and economic activity.”

Under the Act, the Soboba Band receives an adequate and secure future water supply (9,000 acre-feet per year); $18 million from the water districts for economic development; and 128 acres of land near Diamond Valley Lake for commercial development.

In addition to the federal funding for the aquifer recharge project, Soboba’s neighboring communities will receive up to 100 acres of Soboba reservation land for endangered species habitat and up to 4,900 acre-feet of Soboba water for 50 years for basin restoration.

The city of Albuqueruque, which has been drawing drinking water for some years from the Rio Grande (which runs through town), will find its faucet turned off after a Court of Appeals decision on November 28.

From a statement by Amigos Bravo, one of the environmental groups seeking the shutoff:

On November 28, 2011, after four years of deliberation, the Court of Appeals released its decision on our lawsuit against the City of Albuquerque’s diversion of native Rio Grande water. The court recognized the importance of the case and ruled in our favor. We filed the lawsuit in 2004.

To quote from the beginning of a 68 page decision:
“In this significant case, we hold that granting a permit based on an application to divert water, to which an applicant holds no appropriative right and affirmatively asserts no beneficial use of the water diverted, was unsupported by law. Accordingly, we reverse the district court and remand to the district court for further proceedings.”

The City has been and is currently diverting water from the Rio Grande without a right. We have always contended that the diversion of Native Water in this situation is drying up the river, impacting downstream users, and adversely impacting New Mexico’s delivery obligations under the Rio Grande Compact. Water attorneys in New Mexico have called this case one of the most important cases in the history of New Mexico water law. Unfortunately, because the Court of Appeals has remanded the case back to District Court, we are not finished – and all bets are that the case will end up in the NM Supreme Court.

Conservationists have moved their legal challenge to Washington State University’s water rights to the Appeals Court for Eastern Washington.

The latest appeal comes after a Nov. 3 ruling by Whitman County Superior Court Judge David Frazier. Without elaboration, Frazier upheld the decision of the Pollution Control Hearings Board. The Board, which hears challenges of Department of Ecology water rights decisions, ruled in 2008 that Ecology properly allowed WSU to consolidate its wells. That consolidation allowed WSU to expand its golf course despite groundwater levels that are dropping by nearly 1.5 feet each year.

Ecology and the university are both defendants in the appeal.

The case was initiated by Scott Cornelius, a Pullman property owner with a private well. He contends that WSU’s use of water for golf greens contributes to the decline of the Grande Ronde Aquifer upon which he and the cities of Moscow and Pullman depend.

Cornelius contends that WSU’s legal claim to far more groundwater than it has ever used puts the community at risk of running out of water.

“If we win this case, WSU will lose its legal right to huge amounts of water that may not even exist,” said Cornelius. “The university will have much more incentive to conserve and won’t be tempted to sell any of its water rights-something easy to imagine at times like this, when it faces dramatic budget cuts.”

Spokane attorney Rachael Pascal Osborn filed the appeal of Frazier’s decision with the state Court of Appeals on Friday. Osborn represents Cornelius and his co-appellants, the Palouse Water Conservation Network and the Palouse Group of the Sierra Club.”Our case could set a precedent and is being watched closely by those concerned about public water supplies statewide,” said Osborn, attorney for the conservationists, and staff attorney with the Center for Environmental Law & Policy.

Don Coombs of the Palouse Group of the Sierra Club said that, instead of a golf course, WSU should be investing in and inventing sustainable water systems.

“This university sits atop a declining aquifer,” said Coombs. “WSU should ‘walk the talk’ and become a leader in water sustainability not only in Pullman but throughout the nation.”

WSU officials hope to use reclaimed water on the golf course, but have never gotten state funding to build a pipeline from the Pullman water treatment plant.

WSU holds 7 water rights, for 7 different wells. All WSU pumping is coming from the Grande Ronde Aquifer (GRA), which serves the cities of Pullman and Moscow, along with WSU and the University of Idaho. The GRA has been declining at the rate of 1.5 feet per year for 70 years. No one knows the extent of the aquifer, how much water is down there, or how long it will last. The unsustainable pumping of the aquifer is a disaster in the making. No real progress has been made toward a solution.

In the mid-2000′s, WSU decided to build a “championship” golf course that would dramatically increase water pumping. There were efforts to try to stop the golf course, all failed, and it is now built, operating, and draining the aquifer. Meanwhile, WSU decided to consolidate its water rights in order to improve its ability to pump the aquifer, especially to meet increased pumping required by the golf course. In other words, WSU sought authorization to pump all of its water rights from any well or combination of wells.

To do this, the Department of Ecology (DOE) had to consider the validity of the 7 WSU water rights. As it turns out, quite a few of WSU’s water rights are not valid, for various reasons (e.g., WSU failed to use the water and under western water law, “use it or lose it”). WSU holds about 5,000 acre-feet of water but never has used more than 2,000 acre-feet (measured on an annual basis). Pursuant to state law, that unused 3,000 acre feet should be relinquished, but instead, DOE affirmed WSU’s legal ability to pump all of its water – without any regard to the adverse effects of increased pumping on the local aquifer.

The Bureau of Reclamation on November 28 released for public review a Draft Supplemental Environmental Assessment and Finding of No Significant Impact to increase the total quantity of water that can be transferred and exchanged under the existing five-year Accelerated Water Transfer Program approved in February 2011. The Central Valley Project Improvement Act of 1992 authorizes accelerated water transfer programs and Reclamation has acknowledged water transfers and exchanges between Central Valley Project Friant Division and Cross Valley contractors since 1996.

The Draft Supplemental Environmental Assessment/Finding of No Significant Impact (Draft SEA/FONSI) is intended to supplement the existing five-year Accelerated Water Transfer Program (AWTP), which allows up to 255,000 acre-feet (AF) of Central Valley Project (CVP) water to be transferred and/or exchanged. The AWTP is limited to actions between CVP Friant Division contractors and transfers from Friant Division contractors to Cross Valley contractors.

The Draft SEA/FONSI addresses an increase in the total quantity allowed under the AWTP from 255,000 AF to 300,000 AF per contract year. Aside from the increase quantity, the AWTP remains unchanged and would still be in effect during the 2011 through 2015 Contract Years (March 1, 2011 through February 29, 2016).

The Draft SEA/FONSI was prepared in accordance with the National Environmental Policy Act and is available at http://www.usbr.gov/mp/nepa/nepa_projdetails.cfm?Project_ID=6977. If you encounter problems accessing the document online, please call 916-978-5100 or e-mail mppublicaffairs@usbr.gov.

Written comments must be received by close of business on Monday, December 12, 2011, and should be sent to Michael Inthavong, Bureau of Reclamation, South-Central California Area Office, 1243 N Street, Fresno, CA 93721. Comments may also be faxed to Mr. Inthavong at 559-487-5397 or e-mailed to minthavong@usbr.gov.

For additional information or to request a copy of the Draft SEA/FONSI, please contact Mr. Inthavong at 559-487-5044, TTY 800-735-2929. Copies of the draft documents may also be viewed at Reclamation’s Fresno office at the above address.

The Bureau of Reclamation will conduct a meeting with the Byron Bethany Irrigation District on contract terms and conditions for the direct delivery and/or exchange of up to 4,500 acre-feet of its non-Central Valley Project water supply for CVP water. Byron Bethany Irrigation District (Byron Bethany) is requesting a long-term exchange with Reclamation in order to provide operational flexibility and an annual water supply to the Tracy Hills Development, near Tracy, Calif.
Byron Bethany would introduce non-CVP water, in excess of its demands, into the Delta-Mendota Canal, downstream of the C.W. “Bill” Jones Pumping Plant. The non-CVP water Byron-Bethany makes available in excess of its demands would be used by Reclamation to meet a portion of CVP water demands. In exchange, Reclamation would deliver an equal amount of CVP water at a later time to Byron Bethany’s Tracy Hills Development for Municipal and Industrial use in accordance with the negotiated terms and conditions of the contract. The negotiation session will be held: Thursday, December 1, 2011 10 a.m. – 2 p.m. Bureau of Reclamation, Mid-Pacific Region 2800 Cottage Way, E-2901 Roosevelt A and B Sacramento, CA

The public is welcome to attend and will have the opportunity to provide comments. Participation instructions will be available at the session. The proposed contract and other draft documents will also be available at the session.