On July 31, 2018, Bloomberg released an interactive series of maps demonstrating the breakdown of land use in the United States. The article, which can be found here, provides an in-depth look at the ways in which we utilize the nearly 2 billion acres of land in the contiguous United States.

The United States is a huge country, ranking third in the world in both land mass and population. However, the vast majority remains uninhabited. Only around 70 million cumulative acres are considered “urban” land. Another 50 million-or-so acres qualify as “rural residential” land. So, what do we do with the remaining 94%? First and foremost, we farm.

Between pasture, rangeland, and cropland, over half of America’s total acreage is used for agriculture. As shown in the Bloomberg maps, if all the grazing land in the United States were laid out side-by-side, it would cover nearly all of the western states. Additionally, over 391 million acres throughout the country are used for growing commercial and consumable crops.

It is unsurprising, then, that the United States Department of Agriculture (“USDA”) estimates that over 80% of water in the US is used for agricultural purposes. When the proportion of agricultural land is compared to the proportion of agricultural water, the ratio makes sense.

The Bloomberg maps offer a fascinating breakdown of the way our country as a whole makes use of its space and, by extension, its water. Stay tuned to Schroeder Law Offices’ blog for more water use facts!

Authored by: Valley Urricelqui

Did you know that an animal’s performance is based, in part, on their water intake?

Water is the most essential component for livestock’s proper growth, development and performance.

How much water do you think cattle drink each day? Well there are a lot of different factors that lead up to that. It all depends on what type of cattle we are talking about, the weather (What is the temperature outside? Is it summertime or wintertime?) as well as the stage in life the animal is currently in. But it is always important to  remember that, generally speaking, when it comes to watering cattle, the heavier the cattle, the higher the water intake.

Cattle should consume 1-2 gallons of water per 100 pounds of body weight. So if you have a 1500 pound cow, she should be drinking about 15-30 gallons of water on an average day.

Below is a list of the amount of water cattle drink each day:

For more detailed information visit: https://www.grass-fed-solutions.com/cattle-water.html

*Fun Fact: Did you know that cattle have 4 stomachs? The Rumen is the largest and can hold up to 50 gallons of feed!

*Fun Fact: The average cow can drink as much as 30-50 gallons of water on a hot summer day! For pairs to get through the summer time heat, they may need to drink 2x the amount of water.

*Fun Fact: Did you know what I mean by “a pair”? A pair is defined as a momma cow and her baby calf.

As the temperatures begin to increases over 40 degrees – cattle generally require an additional gallon of water for every 10 degree increase in temperature.

Water is crucial for the life of livestock, just as all mammals. In order for livestock owners to maintain healthy and happy livestock they must assure that the animals are properly taken care of. A large part of that starts with maintaining our livestock’s water supply.

On July 11 and 12, 2018, attorney Laura Schroeder and paralegal Rachelq Harman travelled to Caldwell and Twin Falls, Idaho, respectively, for the Idaho Rural Water Association’s (“IRWA”) annual Water Law to YOU Road Show to educate water users and managers all about their municipal water rights. The 6 hour classes discussed the basics of owning, maintaining, and utilizing water rights, along with tips on avoiding potential associated issues such as easement disputes and involuntary forfeiture. The classes also touched on recent developments in Idaho water law, and the status of the State’s multiple ongoing adjudications.

IRWA hosted these presentations that were offered as continuing education credits to satisfy both drinking water and wastewater CEU requirements. Some attendees also planned to seek real estate and/or attorney CE credits for those professional licenses. Attendees came from a variety of backgrounds, including ditch association managers, wastewater treatment operators, and even fellow water law attorneys!

Laura Schroeder’s new class incorporated additional information related to Idaho Department of Environmental Quality’s (“IDEP”) assumption of Idaho’s water quality program from the Environmental Protection Agency (“EPA”). Due to this recent development and the continuing efforts of the Idaho Department of Water Resources (“IDWR”) on the north Idaho adjudications, the class’s focus was expanded from water rights basics. Active participation from students in each session made each presentation unique, and allowed a focus on material of specific relevance and interest to each group.

While this year’s Road Show has come to an end, there are plenty of upcoming opportunities to brush up on your water rights education. Check out Schroeder Law Office’s events page to learn where you can find us next, and stay tuned to Schroeder Law Offices’ blog for more information on upcoming events and water law developments!

Attorney Sarah Liljefelt presented at Halfmoon’s Water Laws and Regulations seminar on June 7^th on the topic of Oregon Groundwater, teaching a group of engineers about groundwater ownership, regulation, and acquisition of groundwater use rights in Oregon. This week, on June 28^th, Sarah will present at the Oregon State Bar Environmental & Natural Resources Section’s “brownbag” continuing legal education seminar on the topic of groundwater regulation in the Klamath Basin in Oregon. Her co-presenter is Lisa Brown of WaterWatch, who will speak about groundwater in Harney County. If you are interested in attending, please visit the Section’s Events page or Schroeder Law Offices’ Coming Events page for more information. Sarah’s presentation materials are available on the Section’s Events page.

Stay tuned to Schroeder Law Offices’ Water Law Blog for more news!

In an often-arid, agricultural community, nothing is more precious than water, particularly in drought years. However, flood years present their own set of challenges as well. When it comes to water allocation, it’s not just how much water that matters, but also when that water is received. Timing is as important as quantity when it comes to water delivery, especially when taking into account the impact snow pack and snow melt has on water supply.

For irrigators in Idaho’s Treasure Valley, this issue has long been a topic of discussion and debate. Water is accumulated and stored in three major reservoirs (Arrowrock, Anderson, and Lucky Peak) and is released throughout irrigation season to water users through a series of canals. Water is diverted to users at various points on the canals, at which time it begins to count toward a user’s annual allotment of water. This is typically not an issue during years of normal water accumulation and distribution. However, when above-average quantities of water accrue in the reservoirs, water must be released earlier in the spring to prevent overflow and flooding.

Early “flood water” releases are the root of the current conflict concerning regulation of water storage in Idaho. Water rights holders are allowed only a certain amount of water under the conditions of their permits and/or certificates. When water is released out of storage earlier in the year, Idaho Water Resources Department advises that the meter starts running regardless of whether or not the water right holder is ready to turn the water into its irrigation facilities. For senior users (holders of rights with earlier priority dates), this means seniors risk running out of water later in the season. Typically, if a senior is not receiving their allowed quantity of water as flows decrease in the hotter months, the senior is able to make a water call on junior priority water right holders. However, if, due to the early release of water, the senior has technically received the storage release of their senior priority water, the senior could be left high and dry.

This issue has been litigated in the Idaho courts as a contested case since 2013, with argument before the Idaho Supreme Court scheduled to occur on June 20, 2018. However, on June 6, 2018, a joint legislative committee met and unanimously called for Governor Butch Otter to hold a special session to pass legislation that would add a new Section 42-115 to the Idaho Code. Section 42-115 would ensure that future water storage projects do not interfere with existing reservoirs. While this proposed legislation will not fully resolve the ongoing issues, nor constitute a settlement between the parties, it may be a positive first step toward resolution.

Stay tuned to Schroder Law Offices’ blog for updates on this legislation, settlement, and other water law topics!

While the negotiation of U.S. international treaties has been in the news lately, the renegotiation of an international treaty of particular importance to the Pacific Northwest has not received much coverage. However, May 29-30, 2018 marked the first round of negotiations between the U.S. and Canada in the effort to renegotiate the Columbia River Treaty.

Notably, May 30, 2018 also marked the 70th anniversary of the historic Vanport flood that wiped out a town of approximately 18,000 residents situated between Portland, Oregon and Vancouver, Washington.[1] On that day in 1948, the Columbia River crested at Portland to fifteen feet above its flood plain and breached the embankment protecting Vanport, which just years earlier was Oregon’s second largest town.[2] While the town of Vanport no longer exists, one of the many legacies of the devastating flood is the Columbia River Treaty and its flood control provisions.

 A Columbia River Treaty between the U.S. and Canada was seriously considered beginning in 1944, but it was not until 1960 that the U.S. and Canada began negotiating the Treaty, which was signed in 1961 and took effect in 1964. The Treaty has no specific end date, but 2024 is the earliest either party may terminate the Treaty and to do so, the party must provide a minimum of 10 years written notice of termination.

The impetus for renegotiating now is that the assured annual flood control procedures in the Treaty will end after 2024 whether or not the Treaty is terminated.[3] After 2024, on-call flood control measures will apply requiring the U.S. to ask Canada to store water after the U.S. has used all available flood control space in U.S. reservoirs.[4] These on-call procedures have been referred to by Oregon and Washington’s Congressional Representatives Peter DeFazio and Cathy McMorris Rodgers as “ad hoc, unplanned” and with the likely potential to cause uncertainty and international disputes.[5]

The Canadian storage created by the Columbia River Treaty includes 15.5 million acre-feet of water in the upper reaches of the Columbia, including the storage behind Libby Dam, which sits near the U.S. and Canada border in Montana and created Lake Koocanusa, a reservoir that backs up 42 miles into British Columbia. While the U.S. benefits from the flood control measures, both countries realize a benefit from the power generated. However, the Treaty was not written specifically to provide water for irrigation or fish subsistence.[6]

Both Canada and the U.S. have spent recent years studying the effects of the Treaty and the various issues that will serve as levers in the negotiation to balance the current and future needs of both countries. These studies ultimately led both countries to consult with stakeholders in their regions and to issue regional recommendations that will serve as the basis for renegotiating the Treaty.[7]

While neither county has given notice of termination, the entities began renegotiating the Treaty on May 29-30, 2018. The next scheduled negotiation is August 15-16, 2018. [8] The renegotiation of the Columbia River Treaty will be important for Pacific Northwest irrigators and water users as the eventual revisions to the Treaty will likely: impact future reservoir storage, alter the timing of reservoir releases, take into account ecological and fish impacts of the Columbia River Power System, and effect utility rates for all electricity customers.

[1] Michael N. McGregor, The Vanport Flood, The Oregon History Project: Oregon Historical Society (Mar. 17, 2018) available at https://oregonhistoryproject.org/articles/essays/the-vanport-flood/#.WxhNxkgvyUm.

[2] Carl Abbott, Vanport, The Oregon Encyclopedia: Oregon Historical Society (Mar. 17, 2018) available at https://oregonencyclopedia.org/articles/vanport/#.WxhNwUgvyUn.

[3] Northwest Power & Conservation Council, Columbia River Treaty, available at https://www.nwcouncil.org/reports/columbia-river-history/columbiarivertreaty.

[4] Id.

[5] Cathy McMorris Rodgers & Peter DeFazio, Modernizing our Columbia River Treaty, OregonLive (Mar. 14, 2018) available at http://www.oregonlive.com/opinion/index.ssf/2018/03/peter_defazio_modernizing_our.html#article.

[6] Columbia River Treaty.

[7] Id.

[8] U.S. Dept. of State, Press Release: On the Opening of Negotiations to Modernize the Columbia River Treaty Regime (May 30, 2018) available at https://www.state.gov/r/pa/prs/ps/2018/05/282867.htm.

Water use conditions in the Klamath Basin continue to worsen in 2018. On March 8, 2018, a water “call” was made in the Klamath Basin, and the Oregon Water Resources Department (“OWRD”) began the validation process for shutting off junior water users. Within the week, on March 13^th, Governor Kate Brown declared a drought in Klamath County, Oregon, the first drought declaration since 2015, coming much sooner than hoped or predicted.

In April, OWRD began regulating off water users in the Klamath Basin. On April 13, the Oregon Water Resources Commission approved temporary emergency rules granting a preference to water rights for human consumption and stock watering in Klamath County. The rules allow certain water users with water rights for human consumption and stock watering to continue using surface water for such uses despite OWRD’s regulation off of water use rights. Exempt uses of groundwater, including domestic and stock uses, may also continue despite OWRD’s regulation. The Commission passed similar temporary rules granting the same preferences during the last drought period.

Also in April, Klamath Project water users found themselves unable to begin irrigating due to a federal court injunction. The Hoopa Valley and Yurok Tribes in northern California previously brought suit against the Bureau of Reclamation and National Marine Fisheries Service in federal court, alleging mismanagement of the Klamath River below the four major dams lead to an outbreak of C. shasta, a parasite that infects juvenile Coho salmon. The court entered an injunction requiring 50,000 acre feet of water stored in Upper Klamath Lake to flush and dilute the parasite until most of the salmon have migrated to the ocean, usually occurring after the beginning of June. Irrigators and irrigation districts petitioned the court to lift the injunction, but the court declined to do so in 2018. For more information, see May 1 article from the Capital Press, Judge upholds Klamath River Injunction.

In May, the Klamath Irrigation District brought suit against OWRD, seeking to compel the agency to take exclusive charge of Upper Klamath Lake to distribute water according to the district’s water use rights determined by the agency in the Klamath Basin Adjudication. The district alleges that it disagrees with the Bureau of Reclamation and PacifiCorps as to the proper distribution of water, and those entities are releasing without valid water use rights, causing injury to the district and its patrons. 

Also in May, the Klamath Tribes filed suit in federal court in northern California against the Bureau of Reclamation, US Fish & Wildlife Service, and National Marine Fisheries Service, alleging violations of the Endangered Species Act and National Environmental Protection Act by failing to maintain appropriate elevations in Upper Klamath Lake. The Tribes seek declaration of the alleged violations, an injunction against further jeopardy and habitat modification, and for the agencies to reinitiate consultation resulting in a new biological opinion.

Finally, on April 27, 2018, the Klamath County Circuit Court issued a Case Management Order in the Klamath Adjudication, outlining a schedule for hearing the first substantive exceptions filed with the court since the judicial phase of the adjudication began in 2013. First the court will decide exceptions made against federally reserved water claims, excluding Tribal claims. Next, the court will decide exceptions against Walton and Klamath Termination Act claims. Third, the court will decide exceptions to Tribal claims. Numerous exceptions have been filed with the court, alleging OWRD awarded too much water to these claims, ignoring the pertinent legal standards for deciding these claims, to the detriment of other Klamath Basin water users. A decision on the first group of exceptions is not anticipated until 2019.

The Upper Klamath Basin Comprehensive Agreement was terminated on December 28, 2017. The agreement called for retirement of irrigation rights to increase stream flows into Upper Klamath Lake by 30,000 acre feet per year. This “retirement” (or cancellation) of water use rights, which was negotiated largely in the absence of upper basin irrigators, was viewed unfavorably by many of the affected irrigators, and was ultimately not funded by Congress. Discussions about alternative agreements continue to this date.

Overall, the return of drought conditions, coupled with fish disease and five years of merely procedural rulings in the Klamath Basin Adjudication, have left water users in the Klamath Basin in serious trouble.

Stay tuned to Schroeder Law Offices‘ Water Law Blog for more water news!

For over half a century, the question of how to conserve and replenish water in Idaho’s largest aquifer, the Eastern Snake Plain Aquifer (ESPA), has been on the collective minds of the state’s water users. Serious droughts in the 1990s increased pressure on the ESPA resource, and preliminary recharge efforts were unsuccessful. Finally, in 2009, the ESPA Comprehensive Aquifer Management Plan, otherwise known as CAMP, was signed into law. CAMP’s goal is to annually recharge 100,000 acre feet (af) during the first ten years of the plan’s implementation, followed by 250,000 af per year thereafter.

The recharge comes from a combination of sources. The Idaho Department of Water Resources (IDWR) also supports canal companies and irrigation districts recharge projects, rotations and efficiency reductions.

The 100,000 af goal was not quite reached in the first few years. Recharge was roughly 75,000 af in both the 2014-2015 and 2015-2016 seasons. However, the 2016-2017 saw 317,000 af returned to the ESPA, far exceeding the 100,000 af goal. The 2017-2018 season is shaping up to be even better. Over 350,000 af have already been replenished.

ESPA’s recharge success is good news for the residents of southern and eastern Idaho, and Idaho in general, as roughly 25% of Idaho’s economy is dependent upon agricultural output from the region. Unfortunately, CAMP’s success in the ESPA has not been matched by similar programs throughout the state and region. The Rathdrum Prairie Aquifer (RPA) in the northern part of the state, which is responsible for roughly 8% of Idaho’s production of goods and services, has a CAMP program in place. However, the RPA has not been nearly as successful as the ESPA at achieving substantial recharge. Another CAMP program has been proposed for the Treasure Valley, but has been delayed due to ongoing discussion between legislators and constituents.

In Washington, the Odessa Groundwater Replacement Program (OGWRP) was implemented to reintroduce water back into the Odessa Aquifer. Several initiatives under the umbrella of this program have been enacted, and have had reasonable success. However, efforts have focused more on limiting usage of the aquifer rather than reintroducing water back into it. Oregon has also taken steps to encourage recharging of its aquifers. However, as illustrated by the attempts in the Umatilla Basin, these programs have struggled to achieve significant recharge.

CAMP’s success did not come overnight. As with any major experimental project, it took decades of planning, communication, and compromise to achieve the ESPA’s level of recharge. Nonetheless, the potential for aquifer recharge demonstrated is inspiring, and will hopefully pave the way for similar projects throughout the West.

Stay tuned to Schroeder Law Offices’ Water Law Blog for more news and events!

Written by Alyssa Holland, Lisa Mae Gage, and Lisa Kane

Water Week 2018 is currently underway as water organizations across the country gather in Washington, D.C. to advocate the importance of water protection and conservation with hopes of ultimately elevating water to a national priority. Organizations in the water sector are using Water Week to ramp up their efforts to educate policymakers about the need for funding to benefit water infrastructure. Many organizations are collaborating for Water Week, including National Association of Clean Water Agencies (“NACWA”), Water Environment Federation (“WEF”), American Water Works Association (“AWWA”), and the National Water Resources Association (“NWRA”), for example.

A few main events will take place during Water Week:

• On April 17-18, 2018 the National Policy Fly-In:
  An event to provide the public with the opportunity to voice concerns and challenges to their policy makers.
• April 17-19, 2018: Water and Wastewater Equipment Manufacturers Association (“WWEMA”) 45th Washington Forum:
  “Effectively Communicating Change at the National, State, and Local Level,” a discussion regarding changes happening in Washington, D.C. and to the nationwide water infrastructure, environmental and public health protection, and legislative and regulatory changes that will impact the water sector.
• On April 19, 2018 the WateReuse Association Water Week 2018 Congressional Briefing:
  Four (4) different communities across the country will be highlighted for their use of water recycling and the local economic benefits that encourage other communities to do the same.

While each organization has a slightly different mission, each has a goal of advancing education regarding water issues and returning to their communities with the priority of educating the general public on the same issues. One of the main events, the Congressional Briefing, will directly discuss tools used in arid states (such as one of our main states of practice, Nevada) to address water scarcity and a way for communities to better manage their local water resources to help spur economic growth and plan for the future.

Schroeder Law Offices Nevada attorney Therese Ure also attends and hosts local conferences in Nevada to continue education regarding how to support the community’s resource challenges and even more particularly, how to support Northern Nevada’s agriculture industry. Click here to see our coming events for local education on the topic. Although attending these events may not be a possibility for everyone, we should all use Water Week as a time to reflect on how valuable water is to our everyday lives and to look for ways to conserve and protect water within our own communities.

On February 1, 2018, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals upheld the “groundwater conduit theory,” whereby a discharge of pollutants into groundwater that is fairly traceable to a navigable surface water is the functional equivalent of a discharge directly into the navigable water body for the purpose of regulation under the Clean Water Act. This argument has been proffered many times in the past, but prior to this case this theory had, at best, narrow and limited success. The full Ninth Circuit case is available here.

The case involved the County of Maui, Hawaii and its wastewater treatment plant. The plant uses four wells as its primary means of disposing effluent into groundwater and the Pacific Ocean. The County injects three to five million gallons of treated wastewater per day into its wells, and, according to the County’s expert, when the County injects 2.8 million gallons of effluent per day, the amount of effluent that reaches the ocean is 3,456 gallons per meter of coastline per day. The Court stated this is “roughly the equivalent of installing a permanently-running garden hose at every meter along the 800 meters of coastline.”

Discharges of pollutants may be authorized by permit under the Clean Water Act’s National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (“NPDES”). Jurisdiction under the Clean Water Act requires three things: 1) addition of a pollutant 2) to a navigable water 3) from a point source. This case focuses on the third requirement. Clean Water Act cases hold that a point source is a discernible, confined, and discrete conveyance, which in a lot of cases really means a pipe, ditch, or canal.

Wells do not directly connect to navigable water (in this case, the Pacific Ocean). Instead, the water injected into wells must travel through groundwater to reach the ocean. In 2013, the EPA, Army Corps of Engineers, Hawaii Department of Health, and University of Hawaii conducted what is called a “tracer dye study.” Essentially, they put dye into the wells and then monitored the ocean for the dye. At its conclusion, the study found a hydraulic connection between two of the wells and the ocean.

The Ninth Circuit concluded that point source discharges that travel indirectly through groundwater to a navigable water, is a violation of the Clean Water Act if the discharger does not have a permit. The Court reasoned that “this case is about preventing the County from doing indirectly what it cannot do directly.” Since the County could not build a waste pipe that emptied directly into the ocean without a permit, it could do so indirectly through its wells to avoid the requirements of the Clean Water Act. 

There are currently cases before the Fourth and Sixth Circuits which also implicate the groundwater conduit theory. If the holding by the Ninth Circuit is adopted by other Circuits, it will represent a change for the NPDES permitting program and regulation under the Clean Water Act. On the other hand, if a split develops in the Circuits, it may lead to litigation in the United States Supreme Court.

Stay tuned to Schroeder Law Offices’ Water Law Blog for more water news!

This article was drafted with the assistance of Law Clerk Derek Gauthier, a student at Lewis & Clark Law School.

World Water Day is an event hosted annually by the United Nations on March 22nd. Each year the event has a theme, and 2018’s theme is “Nature for Water.” Events surrounding World Water Day will focus on nature and how we can use our natural resources to overcome the water challenges of the 21st century. There are water-related crises occurring around the world caused by both environmental damage and climate change. World Water Day 2018 will explore how nature-based solutions have the potential to solve many of the challenges we currently face as a global society. Click here for a list of events occurring for World Water Day across the globe.

The headline facts for World Water Day this year focus not only on water demand, but water availability and water quality. Here are a few of their headline facts on water demand, availability, and quality:

• Demand: 2.1 billion people lack access to safely managed drinking water services
• Availability: Today, around 1.9 billion people live in potentially severely water-scarce areas. By 2050 this could increase to around 3 billion people.
• Quality: Globally, over 80% of the wastewater generated by society flows back into the environment without being treated or reused.

In the United States, most regions have water districts and agencies that oversee water use as well as its reuse, helping to replenish local resources while monitoring for drought or scarcity issues. While this may be true for our country, United Nation’s Water (“UN Water”) works to bring awareness to those places in which regulations are not as well-monitored or addressed, and also brings awareness to improvements that can be made in developed regions. While World Water Day 2018 will bring focus to these issues, more research is required for solutions that impact all corners of the globe. On March 22nd, expect the World Water Development Report to be released highlighting the performance, impact, and scalability relevant to the nature-based solutions thus far.

The UN Water online database contains resources regarding sustainable development goals for clean water and sanitation for further information.

Groundwater is one of the world’s most essential natural resources! According to the United States Geological Survey department (“USGS”) groundwater makes up approximately 1/3 of the public drinking water supply delivered though our county and municipal systems. For rural populations not connected to county or city delivery systems, groundwater makes up about 90% of their drinking water. USGS also reports that groundwater provides over 50 billion gallons per day for agricultural use in the United States. Groundwater pumping has been steadily increasing. In some basins groundwater is being extracted at a faster rate than the basin can recharge. As we are seeing in many states, this excessive pumping can lead to wells drying up, water level decline in hydraulically connected streams and lakes, reduction in water quality, increased costs associated with pumping, and subsidence issues crossed by the loss of water supporting our ground and soils.

The National Groundwater Association (“NGWA”) encourages everyone to participate in National Groundwater Awareness Week. According to NGWA, this year’s theme is “Test. Tend. Treat” to encourage a more holistic approach to groundwater conservation. NGWA is encouraging others to share their stories during this week on social media using the hashtag #GWAW2018. If you are looking for other ways to get involved and promote ground water awareness, the USGS and other water organization have provided some ideas (http://groundwaterawarenessweek.com/). During 2018 National Groundwater Awareness Week, let’s evaluate our own water use and identify ways we can help protect this valuable resource!

Hydropower relicensing and compliance has become a process of constant adaptation and engagement, both with regulatory agencies and with stakeholders. Both adaptation in the licensing and relicensing process and engagement early and frequently helps hydropower facilities better anticipate and adapt to a regulatory process that undergoes many changes in the life of a hydropower license and even in the multiple years (or decades) it can take for relicensing.

Common themes at the Northwest Hydroelectric Association Conference last week in Portland included the importance of engagement with the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) when undertaking relicensing, even in pre-filing phases, to determine the scope of a facility’s study plan. This focus on engagement with FERC is largely driven by the Integrated Licensing Process that requires more pre-filing consultation and involvement with FERC and other resource agencies and stakeholders, such as Indian Tribes, rather than the Traditional Licensing Approach in which review and consultation are a sequential process.

Not only is engagement critical, and now required by FERC, but it helps hydropower projects better adapt to changing natural resource protection requirements during the relicensing process. National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) compliance continues to require extensive analysis in the pre-filing process to conduct scoping with FERC and the resource agencies. Throughout the regulatory workshop, participants emphasized that hydropower facilities’ staff can effectively manage issues, such as invasive species, and will have a better grasp of their license conditions to ensure compliance with and adaptability to license conditions once a license is issued if there is engagement.

Schroeder Law Offices’ attorney Therese Ure is in attendance at the 2018 Family Farm Alliance Conference in Reno, NV and was present for the Reclamation Roundtable wherein Commissioner Brenda Bunman addressed the Family Farm Alliance (“FFA”) membership goals regarding conveying Reclamations under the current administration. Key points of the FFA goals include: 1) creating infrastructure to provide water security and reliable energy; 2) reinvesting to modernize existing infrastructure, and considering creative ways to pay for theses project (welcoming ideas and comments); 3) streamlining projects from the way they are managed to streamlining of the NEPA process; 4) collaborating to create new ideas, listening, sharing, and being transparent; and 5) creating a culture at Reclamation of safety, respect and civility.

Other key points in the Reclamation Roundtable with all the regional directors included a water forecast for 2018, discussion of what current storage will secure or not secure, and how to deal with long term planning by:

• a) creating additional storage through raising dams;
• b) investigating new storage locations (new dams); and
• c) aquifer storage and recovery projects (underground storage) undergoing feasibility studies, working on creative ways to deal with ESA issue, and collaborating with stakeholders.

Do you need funding for a water related study or water use project? The Oregon Water Resources Department’s Development Program is part of Oregon’s 2017 Integrated Water Resources Strategy. The program helps individuals and communities address instream and out-of-stream water needs now and into the future by providing funding opportunities for planning and investing in water use projects. The program is now accepting applications for two funding opportunities: Water Project Grants and Loans and Feasibility Study Grants.

Water Project Grants and Loans are available for instream and out of stream water supply projects that result in economic, environmental, and social/cultural benefits. Loan application materials can be found here, and are due by 5PM on April 25, 2018.

Feasibility Study Grants provide funding to help evaluate the feasibility of a proposed conservation, reuse, or storage project. A grant can provide up to 50% of the total costs of the study, but no more than $500,000 per project. Application materials can be found here, and are due by 5PM on October 17, 2018. 

For more information regarding these funding opportunities please visit the Water Resources Department page.

In 2015, the Environmental Protection Agency (“EPA”) and U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (“Corps”) issued a joint administrative rule, the “WOTUS Rule,” attempting to define the statutory term “waters of the United States” within the Clean Water Act (“CWA”) in order to more clearly define the agencies’ jurisdiction. Schroeder Law Offices summarized the background and scope of the WOTUS Rule in a 2015 blog. The WOTUS Rule was stayed in 2015. Three year later, and after a ruling from the Supreme Court of the United States, litigation over the WOTUS Rule continues. 

On January 22, 2018, the United States Supreme Court issued its unanimous opinion, written by Justice Sotomayor, which settled the jurisdictional question of where challenges to the WOTUS Rule must be filed. The Court held that challenges to the WOTUS Rule must occur in federal district court rather than courts of appeals. The case was remanded to the Sixth Circuit and dismissed for lack of jurisdiction.

This decision by the Supreme Court will likely prolong litigation on the merits of the WOTUS Rule because a decision by a district court for either party is likely to be appealed. Environmentalists have applauded the proposed changes in the rule, while coalitions like the American Farm Bureau Federation and American Petroleum Institute have said the rule will stifle economic growth and add burdensome regulation on farmers and business owners because of expansion of CWA jurisdiction.

On July 27, 2017 the EPA and Corps published a notice of a new proposed rulemaking in the Federal Register. The agencies proposed to replace the stayed 2015 WOTUS Rule with their pre-2015 regulatory procedure. The agencies solicited public comment on the proposed procedure, although, making clear they did not seek public comment on the substance of the pre-2015 rule.

On February 6, 2018, the agencies published the final rule in the Federal Register. The final rule suspends the applicability of the 2015 WOTUS Rule until February 6, 2020. The agencies assert that the suspension of the rule gives agencies the time needed to reconsider the regulatory definition of “waters of the United States.” As reported by Capital Press, the same day the agencies published their final rule a lawsuit was filed by the Attorneys General of New York, California, Connecticut, Maryland, Massachusetts, New Jersey, Oregon, Rhode Island, Vermont, Washington and the District of Columbia in the Southern District of New York. Another lawsuit was filed by numerous environmental groups in Charleston, South Carolina District Court. Both lawsuits challenge the two-year delay in applicability of the WOTUS Rule.

The attorneys general and environmental groups both take the same positions on two issues in their complaints. First, the parties allege the agencies failed to provide meaningful opportunity for public comment in violation of the Administrative Procedure Act (“APA”) because the agencies solicited comments solely on the procedure of the rule, proscribing comment on the substance of the pre-2015 rule. Second, the parties allege the agencies failed to consider all the relevant issues and offer a rational explanation for the suspension of applicability rule, another alleged violation of the APA.

The attorneys general and environmental groups differ in their last claim, however. The attorneys general claim that the CWA does not give the agencies authority to suspend the WOTUS Rule after its effective date passed. The environmental groups claim the agencies violated the APA by failing to publish the pre-2015 rule in the Code of Federal Regulations.

Stay tuned as Schroeder Law Offices brings you updates!

This article was drafted with the assistance of Law Clerk Derek Gauthier, a student at Lewis & Clark Law School.

By Therese Ure and Lisa Mae Gage

Many people are familiar with looking up water right information on Nevada Division of Water Resources (“NDWR”) database and are familiar with reading water right applications, permits and certificates. Is that information reliable enough to conclusively show what your water rights are? The answer is no. Several factors affect the reliability of information found on NDWR’s database and information listed on water right applications, permits and certificates.

NDWR Database

NDWR’s database is not always an accurate reflection of the current standing of a water right. While NDWR strives to maintain its database with the most current and accurate information, you must remember the disclaimer wherein NDWR provides no warranty regarding the accuracy, adequacy, completeness, legality, reliability or usefulness of the information contained within the database. The database is a useful tool to start your search, but it is by no means the last step!

Dual Recording System

Reviewing the database ownership records helps, but often times, water owners forget to “record” water ownership transfers with NDWR after completing the process with the County Recorder. Like the official real property records being maintained by the County Recorder, another set of official records for water rights of use are maintained by NDWR. NDWR updates ownership of water rights, not land, but only upon notification by the water right owner. NDWR has no knowledge of the water use change in ownership until the new owner directly notifies NDWR by filing a Report of Conveyance. Oftentimes new water right holders are unaware of their responsibility to separately notify NDWR of a change in ownership of water rights and therefore NDWR’s listed owner of record may not be accurate.

Water title transfer histories can become vague and confusing, especially when land is subdivided or water rights are expressly transferred off the original place of use property. Following the chain of title of the water rights may take a great deal of time and effort. Most County Recorder offices are updating their systems to allow viewing of recorded documents online, however, research of older documents often times requires physical research and inspection at the County Recorder’s office.

Changes in Water Right Elements

A water right Certificate outlines the elements of a water right at the time it was issued, however these elements can be changed over time. Some of the main “elements” include the source of water, how and when the water can be used, where the water can be used, and the rate and duty the water use. After a permit or certificate is issued, change applications can be filed changing all or a portion of the water use. A water right holder can sell a portion of the right, subsequent permits and/or certificates can be issued for water that is stacked or comingled with the initial water right, or portions of water rights can be lost through cancellation, abandonment and/or forfeiture. It is important to review the entire water right file to verify if any elements of the water use elements have been changed.

Basin Wide Orders

The State Engineer administers water rights in the state of Nevada. Many of the hydrographic groundwater basins are over appropriated and in need of close monitoring. The State Engineer often times issues orders related to groundwater basins that may change terms or add additional requirements to a water use that were not originally listed on the Permit or Certificate. Reviewing information concerning the basin as a whole is an important tool to determining impacts to individual water rights.

It’s no question that water rights are and will always be a very valuable resource. Water right elements, terms and requirements can change over time. While we have outlined a few of the diligence items, often times there is more research that is required. Ensuring water use holders know the terms and conditions of their use will help them stay in compliance in order to continue beneficial use.

In November 2017, the United States Army Corps of Engineers (Corps) published the Willamette Basin Review Feasibility Study, Draft Integrated Feasibility Report and Environmental Assessment (Study). The purpose of the Study (which can be viewed in its entirety here) is to evaluate the reallocation of 1,590,000 acre-feet of Willamette Valley Project stored water. The Study analyzes current and future water demand in the Willamette basin to determine how the water should be reallocated. The analyzed demand uses include agricultural irrigation, municipal and industrial water supply, and conservation storage for Endangered Species Act listed fish. 

The Corps constructed a series of thirteen federal reservoirs in the middle and upper Willamette Basin beginning in the 1930s. Currently, the water is stored under Bureau of Reclamation water use rights that authorize storage for irrigation. The Corps’ proposal would reallocate 962,800 acre-feet of water to fish and wildlife. This discrete category has been allocated the most water in the draft Study, followed by agricultural irrigation at 253,950 acre-feet, and municipal and industrial with the least at 73,300 acre-feet.

For those keeping score at home, those figures do not add up to the allocated 1,590,000 acre-feet. The Corps chose to earmark 299,950 acre-feet to what the agency is classifying as “joint-use.” Joint use allocation is water that can be assigned to any of the other three discrete categories. Thus, the Corps would simply hold that amount in reserve to accommodate “unforeseeable changes to demand trends.” Simply put, this provides the Corps flexibility in the future to disperse water according to demand while simultaneously allowing the agency to avoid allocating all of the water at the current time.

While everyone can agree more water available for appropriation is a good thing, some are unhappy about the way the Corps has proposed to allocate stored water. The Capital Press reported the Oregon Farm Bureau’s position is that water allocated to agricultural irrigation is “not nearly enough.” 

There is still much uncertainty about what will happen next and how long the process will take before water stored in the Willamette Valley Project is available for appropriation. The Study is currently a draft environmental assessment under the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA). Therefore, the Corps is still in the stage where it is developing and evaluating the alternatives. The comment period on the draft Study closed on January 5, 2018.

If the Corps finds no significant impact from the chosen alternative action in the NEPA process, water will then need to be reallocated to the proposed uses. Because the Bureau of Reclamation currently holds the water right certificates that authorize storage for irrigation, the federal agencies must go through the Oregon Water Resources Department’s transfer review process to change the purposes of use for the Project storage rights.

Only after the water use rights authorizing storage in the Project are transferred to the reallocated uses will the water be available for new appropriations in addition to the current authorized use, irrigation. The reallocation could stimulate a rush to the Oregon Water Resources Department’s office for application submission. As the old adage goes, “the early-bird gets the worm.” More aptly, those ready to file for a water right upon the successful completion of the impending process are more likely to get to obtain a much-coveted water use right from the reallocated storage.

Stay tuned to Schroeder Law Offices’ Water Law Blog as this process unfolds!

This article was drafted with the assistance of Law Clerk Derek Gauthier, a student at Lewis & Clark Law School.

On December 19, 2017, Nevada State Engineer issued Order No. 1293, prohibiting the drilling of new domestic wells in the Pahrump Artesian Basin. Previously, the State Engineer designated lands in Pahrump Artesian Basin as coming under the provisions of underground water law through Orders 176, 193 and 205¹. Prior Orders stated that new applications would be denied with very limited exceptions. Recently the State Engineer conducted further investigation into this basin and determined that due to the rate and extent to which groundwater is being depleted, that prohibition of domestic wells under Order No. 1293 is vital to the welfare of the basin.

The State Engineer estimates that the perennial yield of the Pahrump Artesian Basin, or the maximum amount that can be withdrawn to still allow the basin to recharge, is 20,000 acre-feet annually. Yet, the State Engineer estimates that the amount of water from committed rights (amounts of water provided under Permits and Certificates issued by NDWR) amounts to approximately 59,175 acre-feet of withdrawals from the basin. Therefore, the permitted rights authorize almost triple the amount of water that can be withdrawn without impeding the ability of the basin to recharge itself. However, because domestic wells are not subject to permit requirements, this estimated withdrawal number is actually higher as domestic well withdrawals are not included. In fact, Order No. 1293 estimates that there are approximately 11,280 existing domestic wells in the Pahrump Artesian Basin.  Thus, if each well were withdrawing the maximum of 2 acre-feet per year, water withdrawals from the domestic wells alone would exceed the perennial yield. In theory, all wells in the basin may be withdrawing close to 4 times the amount the basin can manage.

Order 1293 prohibits the drilling of any new domestic well, unless a user can obtain an existing permitted right to cover the 2.0 acre feet per year to serve the “new” use. Thus, the only way to obtain a new domestic use will be to go out and buy a water right!  Once purchased, these acquired rights will be “given back” to the basin under a relinquishment process with NDWR while allowing the domestic use to continue without a water right. Further exempted from Order 1293 are domestic wells requiring rehabilitation under Nevada Administrative Code (“NAC”) 534.189, wells requiring reconditioning under NAC 534.188, or existing wells needing replacement.

The domestic well exemption was a great policy for many single families wishing to develop their property. However, protecting our valuable water resources is top priority, and this purchase and relinquishment program will still allow for property development with proper resource protection. For a full reading of Order 1293, please visit http://images.water.nv.gov/images/Orders/1293o.pdf.

¹Nevada Revised Statutes (“NRS”) chapter 534.013 defines domestic use as culinary and household purposes for a single-family dwelling, watering of a family garden and lawn and watering of livestock, domestic animals and household pets. Pursuant to NRS 534.180, if a well is being used for domestic use and the use does not exceed 2 acre-feet per year, the well is exempt from the permitting process under with Nevada Division of Water Resources (“NDWR”) for water use.  

2017 was an eventful year for the team at Schroeder Law Offices (“SLO”). As SLO moves toward a productive 2018, we are pleased to highlight the exciting events of 2017 and what’s ahead in the New Year!

In February we hosted a reception honoring Al Steninger at the Society for Range Management in St. George, Utah. Shareholders Laura Schroeder and Therese Ure, as well as Alan Schroeder, had the honor of celebrating the Sustained Lifetime Achievement Award for range consultant Steninger, long-time friend and consultant to the firm.

In April 2017, our Reno Office received a new home moving from the mid-town area to south Reno. The new office includes convenient parking and approx. 2,600 sq feet divided into a roomy, reception area, large and small conference rooms, multiple private offices, and work areas. Should our out-of-town client need a space to work or meet in Reno for a day or more, we have space to share.

After settling in, SLO hosted an open house for all of our clients, consultants and friends to come check out the new Reno space! We enjoyed this event as the Portland team came to Reno to assist in this celebration, complete with Stix Cattle Company barbequing tri tip!

Following the Open House event and team Schroeder’s participation in the Dust Devil Triathlon in Fallon, NV, the SLO team went out to the field! Our firm serves a wide variety of water users including local farmers, and we had a great time learning more about irrigation systems in Northern Nevada from local expert Norm Frey of Frey Ranches, learning about the cattle industry at Stix Cattle Company, and touring the local livestock auction at Fallon Livestock LLC.

While we had a busy year among our Reno Office move, open house, and field day, we are honored to highlight some of our SLO team member’s developments during 2017.

• Associate Attorney Lindsay Thane passed not only the Oregon State Bar in May 2017, but also passed the Montana State Bar in September 2017 – adding a seventh state to our firm’s licensing!
• Legal Secretary Mollie Finke joined our Portland team in April, making her debut in the legal field.
• In November, our Portland team added a new Paralegal, Rachelq Harman.
• In December, paralegal Tara J. Jackson took a sabbatical, chasing sunny weather with a couple of weeks exploring the north island of New Zealand, enjoying beautiful vistas and mountain biking and finished out her time in Arizona spending more time on her bike and with family. Tara is now back on board.

In the New Year, SLO is looking forward to hosting more classes and/or workshops regarding water law. In 2017 as well as past years, SLO Shareholders Therese Ure and Laura Schroeder have hosted water rights bootcamp classes as well as real estate water right classes. Keep an eye on our coming events list for classes and events to come in 2018, or check out our speaking and presentations page for a list of topics.