Precious water: Nevada lawmakers have decisions ahead on conservation bills
Assembly Bill 109 (AB109), dubbed the 'water application fairness bill,' challenges a loophole that allows some companies to escape regulatory reviews that come in the permitting process. 'Consumptive use' of water gets a fresh look in AB109. The bill doesn't go along with the thinking that nothing has really changed if the water is returned to where it was removed.
'Yes, you can return water to the source after it's pumped. But that pumping throws off aquifers. And it unstabilizes and unbalances aquifers. And so even if you return ever drop, you can still have major impacts on an aquifer and water can go in different directions and go to different places,' according to Kyle Roerink, executive director of the conservation-minded Great Basin Water Network.
'And so then you're harming springs, which are surface expressions of groundwater and you're harming the overall stability when you pump large quantities, even if it's returned,' Roerink said.
He said AB109 fixes that, simply by requiring the permit and ensuring no one is exempt.
Union workers written up, fired for using sick days; Nevada lawmaker moves to close loophole
Democratic Assem. Selena La Rue Hatch is sponsoring AB109.
'During my work with the Interim Natural Resources committee it came to my attention that there was a loophole in Nevada law that may need closing. As we all know, as the driest state in the nation, our water is precious and limited. Therefore, under our current laws, all water used in the state must be put to beneficial use,' La Rue Hatch said Friday.
'To ensure this, all water uses must be reviewed by the State Engineer to ensure water is available, existing water rights will not be harmed, and the water will indeed be put to beneficial use while protecting the public interest. Unfortunately, there are some select industries who are not subject to this review and are able to use the waters of Nevada without this critical oversight,' she said.
'My intention with this bill is to ensure that all industries go through this same process and that our water is protected. This bill brings clarity to a confusing section of statute and ensures parity for all water users while protecting the water that we all hold so dear,' La Rue Hatch said.
Farmers and companies involved in hard-rock mining have to apply for groundwater permits, and this bill would remove exceptions for geothermal projects and new mining methods — including some lithium mining techniques.
Groundwater is serious business in Nevada. A number of endemic species live in springs that could dry up with overpumping, and 10% of the Las Vegas valley's water comes from wells, even if all you ever hear about is the 90% that comes from Lake Mead.
A fiscal note for the bill indicates there are about 450 active geothermal projects across the state.
Albemarle, the company that operates the only active lithium mine in the U.S. at Silver Peak, west of Tonopah, states on its website: 'We carefully measure water withdrawals and continuously monitor groundwater systems, both freshwater and brine, to confirm there are no adverse impacts to the nearby water resources.'
Roerink calls it 'the most important water bill that we can pass this session' and points out that it protects wildlife, property rights, due process, the public interest, and even mining companies by ensuring their competition has to follow the same law.
Another piece of legislation is the first proposal of its kind in Nevada.
WATER CONSERVATION PLANS: AB134 would create a beneficial use that is a 'non-use' — a strictly conservational use, Roerink said. The bill goes beyond protecting springs for wildlife, and it's about more than fallowing fields to save water temporarily. He's concerned about the risks if water 'profiteering' takes hold in Nevada.
'We're an organization that's really cautious about true-blue, dyed-in-the-wool Nevadans who make a living off their water. We want to make sure that we're protecting those interests as well as being conscious that there's going to be less and less water to go around in the years to come,' Roerink said.
He sees AB134 as a way to limit conflict over water in communities. The Great Basin Water Network sets out these concepts for what the bill would do:
Protect the conserved or saved portion of their right from use-it-or-lose-it provisions in the law for entities that make demonstrable investments in water conservation practices.
Prohibits entities from 'conserving' the entire amount of a permitted, certificated, or vested water right. This prevents abuse from speculators.
Offers alternatives to buy-and-dry proposals that take water and people off the land, invite invasive weeds, and upend rural community dynamics.
Makes provisions voluntary and limited for up to 10 years. Renewals would be allowed after the terms of the Water Conservation Plan expire.
After a Water Conservation Plan expires, 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.
EXPANDING EXISTING WATER CONSERVATION INITIATIVES: Based on an existing program from 2007, AB9 could provide a way to expand conservation programs while putting safeguards in place to prevent speculative uses of water rights. Roerink sees it as a 'halfway' step that might be more acceptable to lawmakers. The bill is still in its formative stages, but it's expected to get a bill hearing next week.
WATER OMNIBUS AND CLEANUP: AB104 renews the effort to retire water rights, buying back those rights from individual users across the state. That was happening with the use of COVID money, Roerink said, but it was completely through administrative channels with no framework under state law. This bill would set up that framework, but it does not request any funding for buybacks. This bill is also scheduled for a hearing next week.
Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


San Francisco Chronicle
10 hours ago
- San Francisco Chronicle
Leaked California redistricting maps show where Democrats would draw new lines
SACRAMENTO — California Democrats would appear to have a shot at flipping several congressional seats next year under a leaked draft map KCRA published Friday. The maps appear to make significant changes to many districts currently held by Republicans. Districts represented by Reps. Doug LaMalfa, R-Chico, and Kevin Kiley, R-Rocklin, change dramatically, making them possible Democratic pickups. Swing districts held by Reps. Adam Gray, D-Turlock; Josh Harder, D-Stockton; and George Whitesides, D-Santa Clarita, appear to become easier to hold for Democrats. The maps appear to also pack more Democrats into the districts of Rep. David Valadao, R-Bakersfield — already a difficult seat for Republicans to hold — and Rep. Darrell Issa, R-San Diego, making it a possible Democratic target. The maps were still being debated on Friday, KCRA reported. Nick Miller, a spokesperson for Assembly Speaker Robert Rivas, said he had not seen KCRA's maps when asked to confirm their authenticity. Democrats intend to imperil at least five Republican incumbents, Gov. Gavin Newsom and legislative leaders have said. The maps represent the centerpiece of Newsom's plan to counter efforts in Texas and other Republican-dominated states to redraw their congressional districts to further favor the GOP. In Texas and most other states, congressional maps are drawn by state lawmakers and can be manipulated by whichever party is in power. But in California, maps are drawn by an independent redistricting commission that includes equal numbers of Democrats and Republicans. The proposed ballot measure would replace the commission's maps with the new ones released by the Legislature. They would be in effect for the 2026, 2028 and 2030 elections. After that, the independent commission would draw new maps based on the 2030 census. That argument has not assuaged opponents, particularly in the Republican Party. 'No matter how you slice it, he is undermining the will of the voters,' Assembly Republican Leader James Gallagher, R-Yuba City, told the Chronicle ahead of the maps' release. He said he thinks the independent commission has drawn fair maps and that he worries new maps drawn to benefit Democrats will diminish the voting power of people in rural parts of the state. Gallagher said he supports an effort by Rep. Kevin Kiley, R-Rocklin, who previously served in the state Assembly, to bar all states from engaging in mid-decade redistricting. That could halt efforts in California as well as in Texas, though Gallagher stopped short of criticizing Texas Republicans for their redistricting push, saying that was not his role. LaMalfa said he opposes Kiley's bill because he doesn't think the federal government should trample on states' rights to run their own elections. But he also opposes efforts in both California and Texas to redistrict mid-decade. 'Two wrongs don't make a right,' LaMalfa said in response to Newsom's argument that Texas' redistricting forced his hand. Under the draft map, LaMalfa's district seems to change dramatically, shedding ruby-red northern counties like Modoc, Siskiyou and Shasta. Instead, it gains somewhat less-red Plumas County, but it will also extend south and west to include parts of much bluer Mendocino, Lake, and Sonoma counties along the Highway 101 corridor — including, apparently, much of the North Bay city of Santa Rosa. Amy Thoma Tan, a spokesperson for the campaign opposing Newsom's ballot measure, said it was inappropriate for state lawmakers, some of whom are actively running for Congress, to draw new maps. 'These maps were drawn by politicians and party insiders behind closed doors with no transparency and no input from the public,' she wrote in a statement. 'Californians deserve district lines that are drawn in the open, by our citizens' independent commission.' 'Californians oppose Newsom's stunt because they won't let a self-serving politician rig the system to further his career,' he wrote in a statement. 'The NRCC is prepared to fight this illegal power grab in the courts and at the ballot box to stop Newsom in his tracks.


Politico
10 hours ago
- Politico
California Dems release map drawn to oust 5 House Republicans
California Gov. Gavin Newsom speaks during a news conference Thursday, Aug. 14, 2025, in Los Angeles. | Marcio Jose Sanchez/AP By Blake Jones and Melanie Mason 08/15/2025 07:29 PM EDT SACRAMENTO, California — California Democrats on Friday finalized their plan to snatch five GOP House seats next year by redrawing the state's congressional lines, according to a copy of the new House map submitted to the Legislature on behalf of the DCCC. The new lines, which voters would need to approve in a Nov. 4 special election, adds registered Democratic voters to districts held by Republicans and frontline Democrats, while making some safe blue districts slightly more competitive. State legislators are expected next week to place the new district lines on the statewide ballot, sparking a furious campaign to override the work of the state's independent redistricting commission for the next several election cycles. California's bold and risky play, led by Gov. Gavin Newsom and senior members of the state's congressional delegation, is designed to cancel out Republicans' bid to flip five Democratic-held House seats in Texas — a tactic urged by President Donald Trump to retain the House majority.


San Francisco Chronicle
11 hours ago
- San Francisco Chronicle
The next steps in California Democrats' plan to counter Texas Republicans' redistricting push
SACRAMENTO, Calif. (AP) — California is the first Democratic-led state to wade into a brewing national redistricting fight after President Donald Trump urged Texas Republicans to draw new maps to maintain the party's slim U.S. House majority after the 2026 midterm elections. The Texas plan was temporarily stalled when minority Democrats left the state to stop the Legislature from passing any bills, but some lawmakers said they'll return to Texas now that California is moving forward with its counter act. Both parties hope to add five seats for their side. Here's what happens next in California: Legislative approval Lawmakers will return to the Capitol on Monday after summer break and plan to immediately take up the partisan plan. State Democrats hold supermajorities in both chambers — enough to act without any Republican votes — and Newsom has said he's not worried about winning the required support from two-thirds of lawmakers to advance the maps. Lawmakers will hold hearings on Tuesday and Wednesday on a package of bills to establish the new congressional map, declare a Nov. 4 special election and authorize to reimburse local government for the costs. Elections committees in both houses are asking for public feedback on the proposed map, but it's unlikely any changes would be made after the bills are officially introduced Monday. Amendments to any legislation would require a 72-hour wait before a vote. That would jeopardize Democrats' plan to approve the package by Thursday to give elections officials enough time to prepare ballots for a statewide election in November. State leaders already have blown past deadlines designed to give local officials adequate time for organizing an election. Special elections are costly California sends every voter a mail-in ballot roughly a month before each election. That means local officials have less than two months to prepare and print ballots. They're already preparing. On Friday, a coalition of county officials urged the Legislature to provide money in advance, because many counties are cash-strapped, and officials worry they won't have enough money to administer the election. A 2021 special election cost over $200 million to conduct. State Republicans this week estimated this year's would cost $235 million. Democrats chose Nov. 4 for the election because Los Angeles County and others are already holding local elections that day. An intense campaign Newsom is leading the campaign in favor of the maps. He and Democrats signaled Thursday they'll make the effort a referendum on Trump and tie it to the future of American democracy. Perhaps the most prominent opponent will be former Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger, who championed the state's independent redistricting commission during his time in office. On Friday, he posted a photo of himself lifting weights on social media wearing a T-shirt that called to 'terminate gerrymandering,' a nod to his role in the "Terminator' movies. Republican donor Charles Munger Jr., who spent tens of millions to support the California ballot initiative that gives redistricting power to an independent commission, also plans to 'vigorously defend' nonpartisan redistricting, his spokesperson said. State Republicans say the move is a power grab by Democrats and some have vowed to go to court. Steve Hilton, a Republican candidate for governor, earlier this month paid for a legal opinion that says redistricting outside of the normal process and cycle violates the California Constitution. The new map wouldn't be fair because state lawmakers are relying on outdated population data, he said. Common Cause, a good governance group that supports independent redistricting, initially opposed California's effort but this week reversed its stance. The group said it won't challenge partisan redistricting in California if the effort is approved by voters, among other criteria. A temporary change California voters in 2010 gave the power to draw congressional maps to an independent commission, with the goal of making the process less partisan. The commission last redrew maps following the 2020 census, and the maps were in place for the 2022 and 2024 U.S. House elections.