Utah Water Policy Affects Wetlands

November 30, 2008 in Water by DJ | 1 comment


(Irrigation lines in the Parowan Valley flowing despite below-freezing temperatures.)

The Salt Lake Tribune reports on a study showing that wetlands near the Great Salt Lake continue to dry out, no longer supporting migratory birds as they used to.

“State researchers say flow from a set of natural springs near the north end of the lake has dropped 80 percent since the late 1960s… The decline corresponds with a significant increase in groundwater pumping for agriculture upstream from the wildlife area and below-average precipitation, according to a study by the Utah Geological Survey and the Utah Division of Water Rights.”

Utah has a system of water rights in which water is considered a punlicly-owned resource, and you must own “shares” of water in order to use groundwater.  Under state law, a home requires .45 acre feet of water rights, .028 acre feet per horse or cow, and 4 acre feet to irrigate an acre of land regardless of the actual requirement of the crop planted.  A home with 1/8 acre of landscaping would require 1 acre-foot of water rights.  (An acre-foot is the amount of water it would take to cover an acre, one foot deep.  That’s 43,560 cubic feet, or approximately 325,851 gallons.)

But the system is complicated by a “use it or lose it” feature– if you’re not putting your shares to “beneficial use,” the state can take them away.  And there’s no metering to determine how much each user takes out of the ground, just observation of what each user does with the water they have.

To demonstrate beneficial use, many farmers leave their irrigation water flowing whether it’s neede3d or not– in the rain, in the snow, and long after the alfalfa has been harvested.  After all, if the irrigation cooperative allows 8 gallons per minute, and it doesn’t cost any more to use it, using less than 8 gpm might suggest you don;t need all your shares.

Ironically, the water right system was implemented to limit water use.  Unfortunately, the way it’s implemented, it encourages waste rather than conservation.