GBWN Proposal to Tackle Use-It-Or-Lose-It Moves Forward

There are no shibboleths in an era of drought and aridity. And the Nevada Legislature is taking note. 

In the 2025 legislative session, state lawmakers will consider a proposal GBWN put forth to modernize use-it-or-lose-it provisions that have long guided water management in the nation’s driest state. Similar concepts have become law in Utah, Idaho and Arizona. And now is the time to make them work in the nation’s driest state.

An interim committee passed the proposal in late August, meaning that the bill will likely get some attention in the upcoming legislative session that begins in February 2025. GBWN’s proposal offers water-saving benefits without losing the protections for water rights holders that are inherent in the usage policy.

This voluntary program is a way to prevent entities that make conservation investments from losing the physical and economic values of their water rights if they want to use less.

The debate over use-it-or-lose-it provisions in western water law divides the public. Some view the policy — deeply rooted in the Doctrine of Prior Appropriation — as antiquated and wasteful. Critics, however, often don’t see the benefits: Use-it-or-lose-it policies protect water sources and communities from speculators or hoarders who want to sit on supplies to increase the value of water for profit.

We are sensitive to the needs of water users and the environment. That’s why we are supporting pragmatic measures rather than desperate ones. What we are putting forward can benefit the needs of the water user as much as it can the concerned citizen.

Here’s what we are looking to do.

The bill creates a system where an entity making a demonstrable investment in a conservation measure — going from flood irrigation to efficient sprinklers or drip, for example — can file a water conservation plan with state regulators.

By filing the plan and demonstrating a real investment, water users can keep the duty (amount) of their water rights without abandoning or forfeiting the amount of water that they are conserving with their new investment. This lets Nevadans keep the economic value of the full water right while reducing use and limiting other factors like pumping costs. The duration, for now, will be a 10-year permit, which could be renewed afterwards.

For example, this bill prevents the loss of a portion of a water right if an entity using 130 acre feet makes a conservation investment that saves 30 acre feet and decides to no longer pump or divert that “conserved” amount of water. In order to prevent abandonment or forfeiture of a right, however, the entity must file a Water Conservation Plan with the State Engineer that details the conservation investment and the amount of water conserved/saved.

The Water Conservation Plan allows entities to continue beneficially using water on the same acreage while using less, keeping the full value of the water right permit, and avoiding forfeiture or abandonment.  

WHAT OUR PROPOSAL ACHIEVES:

• For entities that make demonstrable investments in water conservation practices, this bill would protect the conserved or saved portion of their right from use-it-or-lose-it provisions in the law.
• The bill prohibits entities from “conserving” the entire amount of a permitted, certificated, or vested water right. This prevents abuse from speculators.
• This bill offers alternatives to buy-and-dry proposals that take water and people off the land, invite invasive weeds, and upend rural community dynamics.
• These provisions are voluntary and limited for up to 10 years. Renewals would be allowed after the terms of the Water Conservation Plan expire.
• After expiration of a Water Conservation Plan, a water user could resume putting that water to use again for non-conservation purposes.
• The proposal respects the principle of “enlargement,” which means another water user couldn’t use the “conserved” or “saved” water that’s flowing downstream.

This proposal provides options to water users, protects small businesses who are making water-saving investments, encourages recharging of aquifers and hopes to see more water in our rivers/creeks/streams.

This isn’t perfect. Nothing ever is. But it is an option that we can consider. As stakeholders and lawmakers consider this effort moving forward, all we ask is that we take a moment to responsibly consider our options moving forward.

A few years ago, there were proposals to eliminate use-it-or-lose it in Nevada that had a dangerous specter of speculation written all over it. We avoided that route and defeated the proposal. And we will do whatever it takes to avoid entities that want to corrupt and contort our proposal. For now, we are open to pragmatic suggestions and collaboration. Shoot us a line. Let us know what you think: info@greatbasinwater.org

SEE OUR FULL PROPOSAL TO LAWMAKERS BELOW