February 5, 2014

Mr. King

explained how many basins in Nevada were currently designated as areas of “active management”, and having that designation opened them up to additional regulations. Pahrump has not yet been designated as such. He also related that if more than 51% of the basin stakeholders do not buy into a plan, not much progress will be made toward a solution.

Mr. King

did not know exactly how many water rights were issued post 1970 upon questioning from Dave Caudle. It was also explained that a Change Application must be filed should water usage be changed from its original intent, and place of use or diversion except in the case of commercial water which is all encompassing due to the diversity of usages within that category. It was noted that Malcom Wilson from the DWR will be assisting the Eureka groundwater committee. Wendy Barnett requested that there be a sharing of ideas between both committees facilitated by the DWR. Mr. King related that changes now in State Statutes could become effective by July 1, 2015 or even sooner. Nathan Gent, legal counsel, clarified that term length for officers of the committee was for one year and not for the length of the committee’s existence. Walt Kuver asked what was the DWR’s position on paper water rights that do not have “wet water” to back them up? His concern was for domestic water users and how they may be affected by AB419 with regards to seniority of water rights. Mr. King explained that if a basin was declared “critical” there was a 10 year time frame in which that basin could implement solutions before the State might take control of the water.

Mr. King

related that water rights can be moved to the Fan only if they originated on the Fan even if they had previously been moved off of the Fan at an earlier date. Upon questioning, he explained that in 1949 the basin had been described as artesian but that no longer applied. Discussion ensued about Las Vegas’s attempts to import water from the Pahrump Basin and how critical basin designation may financially impact well owners. Mr. King emphasized that everyone in the basin must work together in caring for this limited resource. Nathan Gent, legal counsel, in response to a previous question, related that the length of term that the committee will serve shall be determined by the BOCC as they are responsible for its formation. 3 Groundwater Advisory Committee February 5, 2014 Oz Wichman who compiled all of the information in the Basin 162 GWMP notebook, related that information in the notebook was included for historical reference only.