Independent investigative news

Welcome to Nye's Lies

We report on Nye County: the meetings, the money, the water, and what your county government does with all of it.

Everything under Nye County government and resources in the menu is public record, organized so you can actually use it: every meeting and agenda, every bill before the county, water rights, campaign money, what every county employee is paid, and where the budget goes. Dig around. It is all yours.

Alerts only when we publish. Unsubscribe any time.

Public meetings / Basin 162

August 25, 2014

5 turns, 5 with a named speaker, under 3 agenda items. The words and the names are the county clerk's.

8. (00:06:26) Presentation by Leising Geoscience regarding Hydrologic and

Mr. Leising

discussed the Las Vegas hydrostratigraphy. Due to many similarities between the geology of the Las Vegas Basin and the Pahrump Basin, there is a possibility there may be a highly transmissive “sweet spot” in the alluvium of the Pahrump Basin like there is in the Las Vegas Basin. Once the synthesis or consolidation report has been made it will be available to all interested parties. Next, a hydrostratigraphic report can be generated if the data justifies moving forward. There may be new water resources identified as a result of this research which can be used as a planning tool for future projects. 2 Groundwater Advisory Committee August 25,, 2014

Mr. Leising

gave a general overview of each phase, the associated costs plus a timeline. The additional Climate-Recharge Project was briefly discussed as it relates to predicting natural recharge of water in the basin. This will help to quantify relative amounts of alluvial recharge derived locally from the Spring Mountains. Climate signals will be reflected in the amount of water coming off of the mountains but not in the deep alluvial aquifer. Costs for this phase were also explained. Once again Mr. Leising expressed that this was a research project and that work will halt immediately if he feels that he cannot accomplish his goals. Greg Dann related that this project was of great importance. He felt that northeastern areas of the valley also need to be included as a focus point. Mr. Leising noted that there may be a greater chance of finding a sweet spot in the northern areas based upon results of studies of similar geologic areas. Walt Kuver had questions about the climate analysis. He too felt that the north end of the valley should be included. Lenny Badger was in agreement. Mr. Leising felt that adding the northern areas will not add much to the total cost of the study. Levi Kryder related that Staff had decided the study should be refocused to the southern end of the valley because there was much less data available for that area. Since there was minimal development there it was thought this may become a location for new pumping for a future water redistribution project.

10. (01:09:07) For Possible Action – Presentation, discussion and possible decision

Mr. Kuver

wanted Staff to explore potential growth control measures that might be allowed under existing law. There may be some areas where the PRPC must be involved especially as it applies to updating the Master Plan. There were other items that will have to be addressed through BDR’s as they deal with state water law reform. Greg Hafen related that Darrell Lacy had addressed the “takings” issue at a previous meeting. Darrell Lacy had no issues with undertaking Mr. Kuver’s request. He talked about “zombie” subdivisions and the existence of long standing subdivision agreements that have not been acted upon. He related that Master Plan changes were the first step toward addressing some of these issues. The question of what the future target population for Pahrump must be addressed. Over appropriation vs. under allocating those rights is a matter of concern. What happens to the left over water? The issue of the State managing over appropriation by priority date was also discussed. Mr. Lacy recommended that the Bill Draft section of Mr. Kuver’s list be addressed ASAP by this Committee.

Mr. Hafen

wished to push forward with addressing the rest of the items on the priority list before the Committee began to address Mr. Kuver’s concerns. It may be best to bring back these issues in a couple of months.

12. (03:08:00) Staff Reports/Comments:

Mr. Kryder

informed the committee that he had visited the Trout Canyon Spring on August 13th with Joe Phillips the engineer from Sunrise Engineering in an attempt to measure discharge. Due to the physical difficulty in taking the measurement they were only able to collect about 1/3 of the actual flow. They came up with a rough estimate of about 140 gallons per minute, which equates to approximately 1 CFS. The water right for power generation at that spring is currently listed as 5 CFS. This is the first 5 Groundwater Advisory Committee August 25,, 2014 in a series of measurements to take place over the next year. He hopes to have an actual weir installed in the near future to facilitate more accurate measurements. He reminded everyone that at this time of the year discharge rates are traditionally lower than at other times and we are also in the midst of a severe drought. D. John Klenke None .