January 12, 2015

Mr. Wichman

suggested that the committee consider of J-13 which deals with banking of water rights. He went on to discuss the proposal for a new county regulation that calls for increasing relinquishment of water rights in a 3/1 ratio. This requirement could also be applied to a plan for “banking” of water rights: 1 right goes in the bank which the owner retains indefinitely, and 2 rights go back to the basin never to be used. This proposal would have to be presented to the state in a BDR. As a result PBU’s would no longer be required and owners are not forced to waste water every 5 years. This method could remove a lot of the over allocated water rights from the books. One member of the public had concerns about people speculating in water rights for profit. Mr. Wichman noted that once water rights are relinquished they are gone forever. Volunteer banking of water rights will not solve the entire problem but could be part of a solution. It will lower the overall pumpage inventory of the basin. This could potentially benefit both the small owner and large developers that have extra rights which may not be used for a very long time. Walt Kuver suggested there is a need to perform an inventory of basin water rights in order to see who owns what and how much. He agrees with the water banking concept that Mr. Wichman has proposed. Kenny Bent felt that this proposal would be contrary to existing water law. He also noted that the DWR has inventory information available on their website. John Bosta stressed that water rights are meant to be used, and if not, you lose them. Dwight Lilly felt that this plan could move us closer to a solution. Relinquishment of some water rights makes the remainder more valuable. Rick Felling from the State Engineer’s Office related that his office feels domestic wells need to play an important part in moving toward a solution, but they should not shoulder the entire burden. All water users must contribute. The solution is to use less water or bring in new water. The new designation of 8 Groundwater Advisory Committee January 12. 2015 Area of Active Management proposes many new tools that may be used to bring balance back to the basin. Greg Dann wanted to include a study of the carbonate rock aquifer in the Top 10 priority list. Walt Kuver felt that the carbonate rock aquifer could be included as part of an importation plan. There was more discussion on what the final item should be on the priority list. After brief discussion it was decided to include 11 priority items.

Mr. Wichman

recommended that committee members take a close look at the Senate Bill proposals that are included in their back-up. If members have any concerns about specific issues, make a list and submit it to Nye County Water District staff who will make sure that political officials will be able to review their concerns. C. Levi Kryder None D. John Klenke None 11. (05:34:53) For Possible Action – Discussion, Direction and Possible Decision Concerning Future Meetings/Workshops. After discussion, it was decided that a joint meeting of the Groundwater Management Plan Advisory Committee and the Water Board will be scheduled after the Top 11 priority list is presented to the Water Board for their review at the meeting on January 26, 2015. There was a short discussion about setting the date for the next meeting of the Groundwater Committee. Lenny Badger made a motion to set the next meeting of the Groundwater Management Plan Advisory Committee for February 9, 2015 at 9:00 AM. Kristian Bentzen seconded that motion. The motion was approved with a vote of 6-0 in favor. Greg Hafen requested that Oz Wichman check with the Water Board to see if February 23, 2015 would be a good day to schedule a joint meeting of the GWMP Committee and Water Board. Mr. Wichman requested staff to put this request on the agenda for the next Water Board meeting on January 26, 2015. Mr. Wichman also asked Gregory Hafen to present the findings of this committee concerning the priority list to the Water Board at the same meeting.