UTAH LAKE INTERIM WATER DISTRIBUTION PLAN
EFFECTIVE NOVEMBER 1, 1992
April 16, 1993
Dear Water Users:
RE: Water Supply Update Under The Water Distribution
Plan For the Utah Lake Drainage Basin
On November 1, 1992, the River Commissioners were directed to
begin distributing water under the Water Distribution Plan for
the Utah Lake Drainage Basin. At this time, no major problems
have developed. However, we are just approaching the time that
irrigation and increased municipal demands will be placed upon
the system.
In order to provide you with timely information about the
distribution of water, under the plan, I have developed a water
supply update which shows the accounting for both system and
priority storage, and other pertinent data. If this proves
useful, I propose to issue a monthly update for the remainder of
the year. In doing so, I want to keep all water users apprised of
the handling of system and priority storage, and any other water
distribution issues which arise.
Should you have concerns about the distribution of water under
this plan, or questions about the enclosed data, please feel free
to contact this office.
Sincerely,
Robert L. Morgan, P.E.
State Engineer
******************************************************************
INTERIM WATER DISTRIBUTION PLAN FOR THE UTAH LAKE DRAINAGE BASIN
I. INTRODUCTION
Utah is experiencing significant growth in those counties located along
the Wasatch Front. Associated with this growth we are seeing more demands
being placed on out limited water resources, such as the conversion from
irrigation to municipal water use.
With the projects currently under construction and those planned for the
future, it would appear that Utah Lake and its major tributaries will be
facing a number of changes in the manner in which these systems have
historically been operated. This is not to imply that such changes will have
a negative impact, rather with proper planning these changing water use
practices can be handled and existing water rights protected. In addition,
there are a number of major transbasin diversions into the Utah Lake drainage
which need to be better regulated. Diversions between the basins or subbasins
presently total over 300,000 acre-feet annually.
There have been a number of requests made of the State Engineer in recent
years to make decisions on matters which significantly affect water
distribution in the Utah Lake drainage basin. After reviewing this matter, it
appears that some direction is needed to better clarify the relationship
between water rights in the basin; particularly between storage rights in Utah
Lake and storage rights on the upstream tributaries. The State Engineer
believes that in order for the river commissioners to properly administer the
numerous diversions, the extent of the rights and their relationship, one with
another, needs to be fully understood by everyone involved. In simple terms,
we need to begin to manage the water rights on the Provo River, Spanish Fork
River, Utah Lake, Jordan River, and other sources in the basin as one system.
The objective is not to remove local control or involvement in the management
of the waters. Rather, the objective is to ensure the equitable distribution
of water, according to the respective water rights, and to address problems
from a more regional point of view.
The State Engineer prepares this interim distribution plan under authority of
Sections 73-2-1, 73-5-1, -3, and -4, Utah Code Annotated 1953, to distribute
the waters in the Utah Lake drainage basin. Some of the issues which are
presented in this document are beyond the State Engineers' administrative
authority in distribution matters, and it is not his intent to resolve
such issues in implementing this plan. Such items will be addressed and
ultimately resolved in the court adjudication process as set forth under
Chapter 4, Title 73, Utah Code Annotated. This interim distribution plan is
NOT part of the adjudication process, nor will it prejudice anyone's claims
during such action.
This document is intended to establish a general framework within which the
respective rights can be administered. The distribution guidelines follow
the priority doctrine of "first in time, first in right"; and where rights
are equal in priority, each of those rights receives a proportionate share
of the total water available to divert under that priority. The State
Engineer realizes that flexibility will be required as the plan is implemented,
and many problems that arise will need to be handled on a case-by-case basis.
It is also noted that there are many agreements between water users, and such
agreements will be taken into account, when appropriate. Transbasin
diversions (imported water) into the Utah Lake drainage will be administered
in accordance with their individual water rights.
The issues presented in this document have been divided into five subject areas:
1. Water rights in Utah Lake
2. Relationship between storage rights in Utah Lake and upstream
reservoirs
3. Direct flow water rights
4. Other distribution issues
5. Issues to be resolved through the general adjudication procedure
For each subject there is a background section and a distribution guidelines
section. The background section is intended to give the reader some general
information about the issue and some justification for the distribution
guidelines.
II. DEFINITIONS OF TERMS USED IN PROPOSED DISTRIBUTION PLAN
Active Storage (Utah Lake): The storage capacity of Utah Lake between
compromise elevation and 8.7 feet below compromise (the maximum active
storage is 710,000 acre-feet).
Adjudication: The judicial process by which all water right claims in a
given hydrologic area are evaluated, defined and then established by court
decree pursuant to Chapter 4, Title 73, Utah Code Annotated.
Booth Decree: A 1909 court case: Salt Lake City Corp., Utah and Salt Lake
Canal Co., East Jordan Irrigation Co., North Jordan Irrigation Co. and South
Jordan Canal Co. (Plaintiffs) versus J. A. Gardner and A. J. Evans
(Defendants). The Booth Decree covered water rights in Utah Lake and the
Jordan River.
Compromise Elevation: The maximum legal storage elevation in Utah Lake.
Compromise elevation was first established in 1885, and was recently modified
in 1985 to be 4489.045 feet above mean sea level. When the lake is at this
elevation, the total storage capacity is approximately 870,000 acre-feet, of
which 710,000 acre-feet is active storage capacity and 160,000 acre-feet is
inactive storage capacity. Whenever the level of Utah Lake is above the
compromise level, the control gates are required to be fully opened. The
exception to this rule occurs when fully opening the control gates causes the
Jordan River to exceed a maximum flow rate that is specified in the 1985
Compromise Agreement (Civil No. 64770)
Delivery Schedule: A schedule listing the allowable diversion rate in cubic
feet per second per acre, for specific time periods during the irrigation
season.
Direct Flow Right: A water right that diverts water from a surface source
according to its respective priority date.
Distribution Plan: Guidelines for the distribution of water within a drainage
basin or hydrologic system.
Diversion Requirement: The amount of water needed to satisfy the beneficial
uses set forth under a water right.
Inactive Storage (Utah Lake): The portion of Utah Lake that is not accessible
to the pumps, and therefore, cannot be diverted. The inactive storage is
currently estimated to be 160,000 acre-feet (8.7 feet below compromise)
Irrigation Duty: The annual quantity of water in acre-feet per acre
considered to be reasonably necessary to meet the beneficial use requirements
of irrigated land. The irrigation duty takes into consideration the
consumptive use requirements of crops, irrigation efficiency and conveyance
losses.
Morse Decree: A 1901 decree resulting from a series of court cases: Case No.
2861 - Salt Lake City Corp. (Plaintiffs) versus Salt Lake City Water and
Electrical Power Co. (Defendant); Case No. 3449 - J. Geoghegan (Plaintiff)
versus Salt Lake City Corp.(Defendant); and Case No. 3459- J. Geoghegan
(Plaintiff) versus Utah and Salt Lake Canal Co. (Defendant). This decree
defined the water rights on the Jordan River with respect to each other.
Priority Storage: Legal storage under a water right. Such water stored is
not subject to call by other right(s) and can be diverted and used in
accordance with the right.
Primary Storage (Utah Lake): The first 125,000 acre-feet of active storage
in Utah Lake which is set aside to satisfy the diversion requirement of the
primary rights in Utah Lake in years of successive drought. See figure 1.
Primary Storage Rights (Utah Lake): The water rights defined in the Morse
decree to have storage rights in Utah Lake.
Proposed Determination Book: The State Engineer's report and recommendation
to the district court in general adjudication proceedings of all the water
rights within the adjudication drainage area.
Provo River Decree: A 1921 decree resulting out of the court case: Provo
Reservoir Company vs. Provo City (Case No. 2888). The Provo River decree
defined certain water rights in the Provo River drainage.
Secondary Storage Rights (Utah Lake): The storage rights in Utah Lake
established by applications to appropriate water and as confirmed by the
Booth Decree.
Storage Right: The legal right to store water in accordance with a water
right's respective priority date.
Subbasin: Individual drainage system within a larger drainage basin. For
example, the Provo River system can be considered to be a subbasin within
the larger Utah Lake drainage basin.
System Storage: The total active storage water in Utah Lake, excluding the
primary storage, plus water stored in upstream reservoirs under junior
priority date water rights. The maximum value of system storage is 585,000
acre-feet and varies during the year as shown in Table 3. System storage,
whether in Utah Lake or upstream reservoirs, is subject to call to satisfy
the diversion requirements of primary and secondary Utah Lake storage rights.
Real-time gages: A measuring device that allows instantaneous access to data.
Transbasin diversions: Imports or exports of water from one drainage basin or
distribution system to another.
Welby-Jacob Memorandum Decisions: Seven memorandum decisions issued in 1989
by the State Engineer regarding change applications which provided for the
transfer of high quality Provo River water from the Welby and Jacob districts
of the Provo River Project for use by the Salt Lake County Water Conservancy
District (SLCWCD). The water supply for the Welby and Jacob districts was
replaced under both primary and secondary storage rights acquired in Utah
Lake.
III. WATER RIGHTS IN UTAH LAKE
A. Background
There is not a clear understanding of how the uses of Utah Lake water
relate to the quantity of storage in Utah Lake. The approach set forth in
this document looks at the water rights served from Utah Lake in terms of
beneficial use, which is referred to as the "annual diversion requirement."
Water in Utah Lake is stored in order for the users to meet their diversion
requirement. Thus, the storage capacity of Utah Lake does not define the
water rights. Rather, it is the quantity of water necessary to satisfy
the beneficial uses that is the limit and measure of the water rights.
The relationship of one water right to another is also not generally
understood. The water rights in Utah Lake were set forth in both the Morse
(1901) and Booth (1909) decrees. The Morse decree identified two groups
of water rights: 1) Direct flow rights on the Jordan River; and 2) Water
rights in Utah Lake. The Booth decree (1909) allowed for additional
appropriations of water from Utah Lake and set a maximum limit on the
diversions under the storage rights that were set forth in the Morse
decree. This maximum limit was 185,000 acre-feet annually and in part is
based upon a 3.0 acre-feet per acre duty. In this proposed distribution
plan, we refer to the rights that were defined in the Morse decree as
primary storage rights, and all subsequent rights established under
applications to appropriate water as secondary storage rights.
In 1989, the State Engineer approved a number of change applications, in
conjunction with the so-called Welby-Jacob exchange, to transfer the use
of water under the primary and secondary storage rights in Utah Lake. In
evaluating these change applications, the sole supply irrigated acreage
for each water right was determined. For the purposes of this document,
the same sole supply acreages as set forth in the respective memorandum
decisions, are used to calculate the allowable annual diversion requirement.
The acreage amounts used in this plan, and in the Welby-Jacob Exchange
Project, are subject to adjudication by the court. This distribution plan
does not purport to adjudicate these acreage amounts.
In the "Proposed Determination of Water Rights in Utah Lake and Jordan
River Drainage Area, Salt Lake County, West Division" (Proposed
Determination), the State Engineer has recommended an irrigation duty of
5.0 acre-feet per acre. This duty also appears reasonable for those lands
located east of the Jordan River. The proposed determination book
covering the west side of the Jordan River indicates that potential
conveyance losses for canals over one mile in length are not included in
the irrigation duty. Such losses are to be determined in a supplemental
report to the court in conjunction with the general adjudication proceedings
.
Since the potential conveyance losses have not been finalized, a diversion
requirement of 5.0 acre-feet per acre is used to determine the total
annual diversion requirement for the irrigation rights.
Before getting into the distribution guidelines, a review of some basic
information on Utah Lake may be helpful. The total storage capacity of
Utah Lake at compromise elevation (4489.045 feet) is approximately
870,000 acre-feet. Of this, approximately 160,000 acre-feet is inactive
storage (verbal communication, Brad Gardner, Utah Lake-Jordan River
Commissioner). The inactive storage elevation is 8.70 feet below
compromise elevation. The active storage capacity of Utah Lake is 710,000
acre-feet. The average annual inflow (1951-90) to Utah Lake from all
sources is about 726,000 acre-feet. Of this, 346,000 acre-feet is
discharged to the Jordan River and about 380,000 acre-feet is lost to
evaporation.
B. Distribution Guidelines
In distributing the waters of Utah Lake among the primary and secondary
storage rights in the Lake, the following guidelines will be followed:
1. The annual diversion requirement for the primary and secondary
storage rights in Utah Lake are as set forth in Table 1.
2. The water users of Utah Lake are responsible to maintain the pumps
and channels in Utah Lake to allow water to be withdrawn from the lake
down to 8.70 feet below compromise elevation.
3. In order to protect the primary storage rights during consecutive
years of drought, the first 125,000 acre-feet of active storage capacity
in Utah Lake shall be dedicated solely for the use of the primary
storage rights when all other active storage has been used. This
125,000 acre-feet of storage is hereafter referred to as "primary
storage".
4.The remaining 585,000 acre-feet of active storage in Utah Lake up to
compromise level, which may be stored in Utah Lake or in upstream
reservoirs (subject to call by Utah Lake water rights, as set forth
under Section 4.2 of this document), shall be referred to as "system
storage". System storage is to be used to supply the annual diversion
requirements of both primary and secondary storage rights.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Table 1 - Annual diversion requirement for primary and secondary storage
rights in Utah Lake. The quantities of water for the irrigation rights are
based on the irrigated acreages (sole supply acreage) set forth in the
Welby-Jacob memorandum decisions and an irrigation duty of 5.0 acre-feet
per acre. For the municipal and industrial rights the allowable annual
diversion as set forth under the water right(s) was used.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
WR Irrigated
NUMBER Primary Storage Rights (1870) Acreage Acre-Feet
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
59-3499 Utah and Salt Lake Canal Company 7,063.65 35,318
59-5269 SLCWCD(1) - Salt Lake County 2,071.01 10,355
Water Conservancy District
59-3500 South Jordan Canal Company 4,850.05 24,250
59-5270 SLCWCD(1) 1,076.92 5,385
57-7637 East Jordan Irrigation Company 8,092.96 40,465
59-5268 SLCWCD(1) 1,587.04 7,935
59-3496 North Jordan Irrigation Company 1,069.99 5,350
57-5272 SLCWCD 2,099.72 10,499
5722 SLCWCD(1)
57-7624 Salt Lake City Municipal 11,000
57-7624 CUWCD Municipal 25,000
59-3517 Kennecott Utah Copper Corporation Ind 13,750
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total for Primary Rights 189,307
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Secondary Storage Rights Acreage Acre-feet
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
59-13 Utah Lake Distributing Co. (1908) 7,945.37 39,727
59-5271 SLCWCD(1) 687.81 3,439
57-23 Draper Irr. Co. & Sandy Canal Co. 2,100 10,500
(1908)
59-5273 SLCWCD 400 2,000
59-14, Central Utah Water Conservancy Ind 57,073
15 & 20 Dist. (Kenn. Storage Rights 1912)(2)
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total for Secondary Rights 112,739
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Overall Total 302,046
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
(1) Rights/shares held by respective irrigation companies in behalf of Salt
Lake County Water Conservancy District by agreement dated Sept. 19, 1988.
(2) Does not include any storage which may be claimed/allowed under 59-23
5. All water stored upstream which is subject to call under the
priority of the Utah Lake rights (system storage) shall be delivered
to Utah Lake, according to priority, when either the active storage in
Utah Lake is at or below 125,000 acre-feet or the diversion requirements
of earlier priority water rights in Utah Lake are not satisfied.
6. When all the system storage in Utah Lake and upstream reservoirs has
been used, the secondary rights shall cease diversions. At such time,
the active storage in Utah Lake shall be at or below 125,000 acre-feet.
7. After all of the system storage in Utah Lake and in upstream
reservoirs has been used, and secondary rights have ceased diversions,
the primary storage shall be allocated to the primary rights in the
following percentages and will be available on demand within the
constraints of the respective water rights:
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Table 2 - The percentage of primary storage in Utah Lake
allocated to each primary water right.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
WATER RIGHT NUMBER(S) OWNER
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
59-3499 Utah and Salt Lake Canal Company 18.7%
59-3500 South Jordan Canal Company 12.8%
57-7637 East Jordan Irrigation Company 21.4%
59-3496 North Jordan Irrigation Company 2.8%
57-7624 Salt Lake City 5.8%
59-5268/5273, 5722 Salt Lake County Water Conservancy District 18.0%
57-7624 Central Utah Water Conservancy District 13.2%
59-3517 Kennecott Utah Copper Corporation 7.3%
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
IV. RELATIONSHIP OF STORAGE RIGHTS IN UTAH LAKE AND UPSTREAM RESERVOIRS
A. Background
The relationship between upstream storage water rights and storage rights
in Utah Lake must be clarified so all of the storage reservoirs within
the Utah Lake drainage basin can be regulated in accordance with their
respective priority dates. The upstream storage reservoirs have a unique
relationship with Utah Lake storage rights. This section addresses only
the storage rights. Direct flow rights are addressed independently in
Section V.
The upstream storage rights generally have later priority dates than the
Utah Lake storage rights, with only a few exceptions. However, in
analyzing the storage rights within the basin, it appears that in most
years, the existing storage reservoirs can divert and use water without
impairing the prior rights in Utah Lake. Although during drought years,
this has not always been the case.
The State Engineer has studied the historical practices and water supply
conditions in the basin. From these studies, it appears that adequate
safeguards can be developed to allow upstream reservoirs to divert and
store water during most periods of time without impairing prior water
rights. However, these safeguards generally require that predictions of
the total water supply be made early in the year. Predicting whether the
rights in Utah Lake will receive their full annual diversion requirement
is difficult early in the year. As the year progresses, and the water
supply conditions become more apparent, these predictions can be made with
a higher degree of confidence. In order to allow later priority upstream
rights to store water, criteria are needed to determine when the rights
in Utah Lake will likely be satisfied. Until the prior storage rights in
Utah Lake are satisfied, water stored upstream will be held as system
storage, subject to call by water rights in Utah Lake. Also, provisions
to replace or exchange water to Utah Lake during drought periods to allow
storage upstream will be considered.
Applying the following guidelines will ensure with a high degree of
certainty that the rights in Utah Lake will be satisfied. These
guidelines dictate when the upstream reservoirs can convert their system
storage to what is referred to as priority storage. After the water is
converted to priority storage, it is no longer subject to call to Utah
Lake and can then be released from the reservoir and used.
Under this proposal, storage waters will be accounted for based on a
November through October period. The irrigation season in much of the
Utah Lake drainage runs from about April through October, except in the
higher elevations. During the non-irrigation season, the water demand is
much lower than during the irrigation season and generally the storage
season begins in November.
B. Distribution Guidelines
In order to maximize the beneficial use of the water and still protect
prior rights, the State Engineer will use the following criteria to
govern the distribution of water between storage rights in Utah Lake and
reservoirs on upstream tributaries.
1. Upstream storage rights junior to Utah Lake water rights may store
water under their respective priority dates relative to each other and
subject to the conditions set forth in this section.
2. System storage is defined as the top 585,000 acre-feet of active
storage capacity in Utah Lake and is used to satisfy the diversion
requirement of both primary and secondary rights. Any portion of this
585,000 acre-feet stored upstream which is subject to call by Utah
Lake, as provided for under paragraph 5., shall also be accounted for
as system storage.
3. Priority storage is defined to be the legal storage under a
reservoirs' water right and is not subject to call by any other water
right.
4. Any water stored by junior appropriators before the total system
storage in or available to Utah Lake exceeds the quantities set forth
in Table 3, is subject to call by the rights served from Utah Lake.
5. System storage held in upstream reservoirs shall not be diverted for
use and must be held in storage and available for release to Utah Lake,
until such storage is converted to priority storage according to the
criteria in Table 3 or replacement water is provided.
6. Whenever the total system storage exceeds the values set forth in
Table 3, any excess system storage shall be converted to priority
storage. Water is converted from system to priority storage according
to the priority dates of the respective rights, and in accordance with
any other restrictions applicable to a particular water right.
7. Once water has been converted to priority storage or is designated
as priority storage by the river commissioner at the time it is stored,
it can be released from the reservoir and used as provided for under
the respective water right.
8. Any time the storage capacity in Utah Lake drops below the primary
storage capacity (the first 125,000 acre-feet of active storage
capacity), upstream storage rights with later priority dates will not
be allowed to divert water to storage.
9. Any time the active storage capacity in Utah Lake drops below the
primary storage level (125,000 acre-feet), the Utah Lake rights may
call on the system storage water which has been held upstream. The
quantity subject to call is limited to the lesser of either the
quantity of system storage held upstream or the amount needed to
satisfy the diversion requirements and bring Utah Lake up to the
primary storage level.
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Table 3 - Quantity of total system storage
required before upstream storage reservoirs
can convert system storage to priority storage.
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Date System storage in Utah Lake and/or
Upstream Reservoirs (units: ac-ft)
-------------------------------------------------------------------
November 1 585,000
December 15 585,000
January 15 585,000
February 15 585,000
March 15 585,000
April 15 575,000
May 15 475,000
June 15 400,000
July 15 350,000
August 15 250,000
September 15 200,000
October 31 125,000
------------------------------------------------------------------
NOTE:Values can be interpolated from the table to determine
system storage on any particular day.
------------------------------------------------------------------
10. System storage in upstream reservoirs can be replaced in Utah Lake
with waters from other sources or other rights. Once such replacement
is made, a like quantity of system storage can be converted to priority
storage and used. Such replacement or exchange of water shall have
prior approval of the State Engineer.
V. DIRECT FLOW RIGHTS
A. Background
One of the objectives of this proposed distribution plan is to administer
the waters within the basin as one system. In so doing, we need to take
into account what the effects of diversion and water use from a source
may have on other rights in the basin. The distribution of water between
all rights, except those rights specifically denoted in Sections III and
IV as among themselves, shall be done based upon priority. This approach
distributes the water in accordance with the priority doctrine on a basin
wide basis.
B. Distribution Guidelines
In distributing water among the water rights in the basin, except those
rights addressed in Sections 3.0 and 4.0 as among themselves, the
following guidelines will be used:
1. The direct flow water rights on all tributaries will be administered
according to the respective priority dates. The affect that diversions
from one source may have on diversions from another source will be
taken into account.
2. The primary direct flow rights on the Jordan River as set forth in
the Morse decree shall have a call on the water in Utah Lake if the
accretionary flows to the Jordan River are insufficient to satisfy
their rights.
VI. OTHER DISTRIBUTION ISSUES
A. Background
The State Engineer believes that there are several other issues that
should be considered when examining better ways to manage and distribute
water in the basin. Most of these issues are directly related to
improving the record keeping of imported water and enhancing the
communication between the five river commissioners who are affected by
this plan.
One issue that deserves special discussion is a proposed 5,000 acre-feet
regulation pool in Jordanelle Reservoir (Section B.1) to be used by the
Provo River commissioner in distributing water. Based upon past
experiences, calculating the natural flow of the Provo River from
reservoir stage readings at Deer Creek Reservoir has presented numerous
problems for the commissioners. It is important that the river
commissioner not waste his time dealing with such problems. Because the
direct flow rights on the Provo River are senior to nearly all the storage
rights it is necessary for the commissioner to compute natural flow in
the river. The precision of reservoir content measurements on Deer Creek,
and presumably on Jordanelle, are inadequate for daily calculation of
natural flow based on changes in reservoir content. Just .10 foot error
in measurement when Deer Creek Reservoir is nearly full represents about
300 acre-feet. Thus, when the wind is blowing it can substantially
affect the natural flow calculation. The result is a wide fluctuation in
the natural flow available to the class A rights on the Lower Provo River.
With Jordanelle Reservoir now being built, the natural flow computation
for both Heber Valley rights and the Lower Provo River will be even more
complicated. If the commissioner had a regulation pool he could smooth
out the natural flow bypasses as they should be.
The administration of exchange applications is another important
distribution issue. The basic purpose of exchange applications is to
facilitate distribution. Under such an application a water user is
required to measure the quantity of water released to a stream and then
a like quantity can be diverted at another location. In regulating
exchange applications, the State Engineer attempts to have releases and
subsequent diversions occur as concurrently as possible to insure that
other water rights are not adversely effected. Some exchange applications
involve waters from more than one distribution system. In such cases,
the State Engineer needs to establish lines of authority and/or
coordination between the river commissioners.
The State Engineer has reviewed the water rights covering the transbasin
diversion into and out of the basin. Nearly all of these water rights
are certificated and the rights are generally well defined. Thus, the
major issue regarding transbasin diversions is to implement better
accounting procedures.
Although not addressed in the distribution guidelines, the future water
quality of Utah Lake is another important issue that must be considered.
Currently there are many unknowns over what the future operation of Utah
Lake and upstream storage reservoirs will be. This makes it very
difficult to predict the future salinity concentrations in the Lake.
Under Utah water law, a water user is entitled to have his right
protected as to both quantity and quality. We believe that the Central
Utah Water Conservancy District and the Bureau of Reclamation could
significantly affect the future salinity levels of Utah Lake by the
decisions they will be making in the near future. It appears they are
very aware of this problem and are looking at alternatives to control the
salinity level of Utah Lake.
B. Distribution Guidelines
The State Engineer is proposing that the following recommendations be
implemented to facilitate the distribution of water:
1. All exports of water from a river system shall be regulated by the
duly appointed river commissioner for the system from which the export
is made. Such diversions shall be regulated in accordance with the
individual water right.
2. River commissioners shall report diversions on all systems on a
water rights basis.
3. All transbasin diversions shall be equipped with real-time gages.
Such data shall be accessible via a computer using a modem or other
method as approved by the State Engineer.
4. The State Engineer is recommending that a 5,000 acre-foot regulation
pool be established in Jordanelle Reservoir to be used by the
commissioner for distribution system regulation. Such a regulation
pool would be subject to space availability.
5. In regulating exchange applications, they will be administered as
closely to a concurrent release and diversion basis as is feasible.
Under no circumstances will deficits or credits be allowed to be
carried over from year to year.
VII. ADJUDICATION ISSUES
A. Background
There are a number of issues that are beyond the scope of the distribution
plan and will need to be addressed in the general adjudication. However,
ultimately any actions taken in the adjudication will affect the
distribution of water. Therefore, several adjudication issues are
discussed in this document in order to apprise the water users of
potential recommendations which may be made by the State Engineer to the
court in the adjudication.
On the Provo River system there are no priority dates assigned to the
class A rights on the Lower Provo River or class 1 through 17 on the
Upper Provo River. The distribution of water has worked well under this
system for over 70 years, and if conditions did not change we could
continue to operate under the class system. However, we are beginning to
see significant changes in the water use practices within the drainage
basin, especially on the Provo River. To assess the potential impact as
a result of a change in water use, and in order to properly administer
the water rights on a basin-wide basis, it is imperative that the
respective priority dates between the water rights be established.
Therefore, as part of the general adjudication process, the State Engineer
is proposing that priority dates for all water rights in the basin be
determined.
Another issue that needs to be carefully analyzed and considered is the
irrigation diversion requirement (duty) for irrigated lands in the basin.
In conjunction with the proposed determination of water rights that the
State Engineer must submit to the court for its consideration, an
irrigation duty is recommended. In making this recommendation the State
Engineer calculates the consumptive use requirements of the crops and
considers the on-farm efficiency, canal losses and other related factors.
The irrigation duty is expressed in terms of acre-feet per acre.
Related closely to the issue of duty is the issue of whether a delivery
schedule should be implemented to specify an allowable diversion rate
(Example - 1 cubic foot per second per 60 acres) during any period of the
irrigation season. The total volume of water that can be diverted under
the delivery schedule is the annual irrigation duty that is established.
B.Recommendations for the Adjudication
The State Engineer will consider making the following recommendations in
his report to the court in the general adjudication:
1. All water rights within the basin shall have a priority date
determined and assigned to it as part of the adjudication process.
2. An irrigation diversion requirement (duty) and delivery schedule
shall be determined and submitted to the court for each subbasin or
distribution system.
Natural Resources |
Contact |
Disclaimer |
Privacy Policy |
Accessibility Policy