1. Escalante Valley Water Users Assn. & The Ground Water Management Plan November 9, 2011

2. Escalante Valley Water Users Assn. Who is the (EVW) Formed by the irrigation water users in the EV Governed by a 9 member Board of Directors –Mike Brown, Bob Holt, Howard Bracken, Steve Jones, Marlo Reber, Cody Staheli, Brad Bowler, Lee Bracken & LaDel Laub Annual meetings have been held since 2004 Many meetings with previous and current State Eng. Web Page created to keep the public informed –http://evwua.org

3. Escalante Valley Water Users Assn. Activity History –2003 -Collected assessments from water users. –2004 -Retained Dee Hansen to lobby the legislature –2005 - Debated with the legislative task force –2006 - Provided valuable input to ground water law –2007 - Tracked the State Engineers Activities –2008 - Negotiating with the State Engineer –2009 - Lobby local legislators – funding moratorium –2010 - Develop relations with new State Engineer –2011 - Negotiate the frame work for new plan

4. Ground Water Management History 2006 - The legislature passed the “Safe Yield” law 2007- The State Engineer began the process in Beryl 2009 - Legislature passed a Moratorium on funding 2009 - New State Engineer was hired - Kent Jones 2010 – The legislature passed the Local District law 2011 – The new State Engineer requested that water users proactively engage in the process

5. Key Water Legislation Language The State Engineer may develop a ground water management plan to achieve safe yield and “shall” consider “economic impacts” and allow “gradual” implementation. A ground water management plan can include “voluntary arrangements” by the local users. The law requires a public process with “input” from the users and others Statute 75-5-15 section 4, b and c

6. Adaptive Management Review Period Conservation & cropping will be allowed to meet the reductions

7. Estimated water table levels from Dee Hansen study

8. State Engineer Default Process The State Engineer absent a voluntary arrangement by law must cut by priority date. Projected cuts are on the State website –http://waterrights.utah.govhttp://waterrights.utah.gov –Copies are in the back of the room in binders

9. Voluntary Arrangement Pooling of water rights to collectively achieve the necessary water use reductions. The forming of a local water district to manage the ground water management plan and facilitate funding requirements for economic stabilization –Create a buy back option and seek 0 percent loan funding from the State so that water rights can be purchased when they become available and held by the district to achieve necessary reductions.

10. Options to be Considered Municipal & Culinary Water Rights One option to consider is to “protect” existing municipal and culinary water rights. –Municipal/culinary water rights are at risk. –Irrigation users could absorb the reductions. –Municipal and culinary water right owners could participate in the funding of the reductions. –full use of water right for financial participation

11. Local Water District Facts Facilitates voluntary arrangement –Culinary solution –Conservation credits Local control – not like a “special service district” –Created voluntarily by action of those affected –Self Governance - Board representative of water users interests –Voting by water right not land ownership Ability to bond/borrow, enter into agreements & receive grants Allows for protection of water right interests -legal water banking Ability & authority to tax as needed Minimal administrative costs to create & operate

12. Where Do We Go? We need a water management plan that meets the objectives of the water law statue and protects the economic interests of the water users, the local community and State. –The committee has negotiated with the State Engineer to develop a plan that creates a “win-win” solution. –A voluntary plan requires the use of a local water district to facilitate the administrative and financial objectives. –Water users should have a vested interest in protecting the underground water resources and agree that the do nothing approach is not a viable answer.