By Myrna Trauntvein
Times-News Correspondent
Residents of Juab County's West Desert were relieved that Utah Governor Gary Herbert, last Wednesday, determined not to sign an agreement with Nevada that would allow Las Vegas to pump groundwater from the states' shared border.
The decision came after two meetings held with residents--one in Eskdale and the other at West Desert High School in Partoun.
"A majority of local residents do not support the agreement with Nevada," Herbert said, "Therefore, I cannot in good conscience sign the agreement because I won't impose a solution on those most impacted that they themselves cannot support."
At those meetings, Herbert had told those attending the meetings that he would make a decision the first of April.
The water in Snake Valley comes from an aquifer under the 120-mile-long valley. That water supplies ranching and farming enterprises on both the Utah and Nevada sides of the border.
Millard County Commissioners attended the second meeting as did Juab County Commissioners, Chad Winn, chairman, Byron Woodland, commissioner, and Rick Carlton, commissioner, the second for Juab County Commissioners in one month.
Commissioners convened the first monthly commission meeting at the high school there to gain public input to pass on to the governor. Following that meeting, Herbert determined that he would, likewise, meet with the people of the area to discuss the proposed agreement.
Nevada has already signed the agreement, which took four years to negotiate and which would allow the Southern Nevada Water Authority to build a 263-mile pipeline stretching from arid rural areas on the Utah-Nevada border to Las Vegas.
In a statement announcing his decision, Herbert said he could not sign the agreement because Utah residents in the affected area oppose the agreement and, then, referred to the proposal as one of the most complex emotional issues he had to deal with as governor.
In refusing to allow the agreement between Nevada and Utah to be signed, Herbert went against the advice of legal advisors.
"In the absence of these agreements, Nevada, because of its more pressing need for water, may simply appropriate the remaining available water in the Snake Valley groundwater system to the exclusion of Utah's needs for future water supplies," wrote water attorneys whose advice Herbert had sought.
The three lawyers told Herbert in a report filed in November that it was in the best interest of water users to sign the agreement.
Since he decided to not accept the agreement, Herbert said, Nevada will now need to renegotiate with Utah for another agreement before any water is extracted and said that if there was a conflict prior to that time, Utah would take the matter to court.
"I am still open to an agreement in the future," said Herbert.
He would, in that new agreement, be looking for conditions that would meet the approval of the water users from the West Desert of Utah.
"I appreciate that Governor Herbert was responsive to the concerns of the residents of Snake Valley," said Byron Woodland, Juab County commissioner. "I hope that his not signing the agreement will open the way for a new agreement with Nevada that actually does protect the water rights in the valley."
Under the rejected agreement, Snake Valley's groundwater would have been evenly split between Utah and Nevada.
At the meeting held the end of March in Trout Creek, Cecil Garland, a rancher from Callao, urged Herbert not to sign.
"You should never put into jeopardy anything you wish to protect," said Garland, who has ranched in the Callao area for more than 30 years.
Signing the agreement, he said, was putting the arid region's water into jeopardy.
"I would rather go down fighting," said Garland.
On Wednesday, Garland applauded the decision by Herbert not to sign. "In my opinion, he is a hero. He's my hero," Garland said. "He stood up and said and did the right thing."
The agreement called for pumping to be stopped if the water is extracted faster than it can be replaced. The agreement would also have postponed the pumping for 10 years until a review of environmental conditions was completed.
Herbert said that the two states, to date, have not been able to come to an agreement that the people of Utah, particularly those most impacted, feel is in their best interest.
"So we have to live with the consequences, whatever they may be, of not signing the agreement," said Herbert. "But we clearly want to leave the door open."
The Great Basin Water Network (GBWN)has long opposed the agreement.
"Yes, we had a strong reaction (to the Governor not signing the agreement)," said Susan Lynn, Executive Director of Public Resource Associates for 19 years and a member of the GBWN Board of Directors. "We were very pleased that he sided with the people of Utah. We thought the Governor was courageous in the face of strong political pressure. The people in Utah who sent encouragement to the Governor not to sign are to be congratulated too. It was a great psychological win, but we know the other shoe will drop someday. SNWA will not let this go uncontested. The war is not over and there are battles ahead."
The organization's overriding concern is that the Las Vegas metropolitan area and other large communities in the Great Basin implement an effective water conservation program including economic incentive for water smart-practices and implementation of simple, inexpensive conservation measures as opposed to multi-million projects.
