GUEST EDITORIAL - From Wayne Hage
Wayne Hage
P.O. Box 513
Tonopah, Nevada [89049]
(775) 482-4187
ewayne@direcway.com
SB 76 - WRONG ANSWER TO THE WRONG QUESTION
Thomas Pynchon once said; "If they can get you asking the wrong questions, they don't
have to worry about the answers." This would seem to be the case with Senate
Bill 76, introduced by Senator Dean Rhodes, (R) Tuscarrora.
SB 76 is intended to amend 140 years of Nevada water law allowing the federal land
management agencies to acquire water rights presently owned by Nevada ranchers and
farmers.
SB 76 is billed as remedial legislation answering to a Nevada Supreme Court overturn of
District Court Judge Gamble's ruling. Judge Gamble ruled that the BLM and USFS do
not qualify for stockwater rights in Nevada because Nevada law requires an applicant for
stockwater rights to be able to put the water to beneficial use. The BLM and US
Forest Service own no commercial livestock.
The Nevada Supreme Court overturned Judge Gamble's decision, holding that the State Water
Engineer must allow the federal agencies to apply for water rights on unappropriated water
on the "public lands".
Senator Rhodes, in his water bill, then proceeds to ask the wrong question: How can we
amend Nevada's water law to allow the federal agencies to demand all or a portion of a
privately owned water right from Nevada's farmers and ranchers? How this question is
answered is somewhat meaningless, if the end result is the conveyance of private water
rights into the hands of the federal government without compensation. This is being
done at a time when Nevada citizens are facing the largest tax increase in the history of
the state.
When viewed within the world wide rush to control water supplies, we can begin to see
what SB 76 may accomplish if it is passed into law. The quest for control of the world's
fresh water reserves will probably prove to be the defining natural resource issue of the
21st century. An underlying problem in the West Bank, between the Israelis and
Palestinians, is that the West Bank of the Jordan River is the primary source of fresh
water for the entire region. The Golan Heights issue is underscored by the fact that
whoever controls the Golan Heights can control the use of the water in the Jordan River,
which Syria, Israel, Jordan and the Palestinians all rely on. The tensions between
Iraq and Turkey have been exacerbated by Turkey's control of the headwaters of the Tigris
and Euphrates Rivers and Iraq's absolute dependence on the water they carry.
Starving Ethiopia could develop massive food production areas if it could use the water of
the Blue Nile River which originates in Ethiopia's mountainous northwest. The
nations of Chad, Sudan, Egypt and foreign nations with investments in those countries, all
live or die by the water flowing down the Nile. Any attempt by Ethiopia to develop its
water resources would bring immediate retaliation from the downstream nations.
The quest for control of water is alive and well here in the U.S. For example,
the water in Idaho's Boise Valley and the city of Boise itself is controlled by United
Water Corporation. United Water has been diligently working to gain control of the
farmers' irrigation water in the region through, in part, the Bureau of Reclamation.
United Water is a sub-corporation of a company called Suez. Suez controls all
the fresh water in South Korea. Their prospectus states their goal is to become the
largest owner of fresh water in the world. Suez is owned by the United Arab
Emirates.
Boon Pickens, the great Texas oil entrepreneur, has now turned his interest to buying as
many water rights in the Ogallala Aquifer as possible to satisfy the future needs of
Dallas and other Texas cities. In some
places today, a barrel of fresh water is worth more than a barrel of oil.
Here in Nevada, we have had numerous entities vying for control of Nevada's waters.
Vidler Water Company, Las Vegas Valley Water District, and others, have been buying
and seeking to control as many water rights as possible.
The federal government has participated, seeking to use the BLM and Forest Service as
surrogates, to wrest water rights away from private individuals and into the hands of
government and its creditors. Most of the water in Nevada is controlled by the
state's farmers and ranchers. The basic strategy behind the water grab is to use
environmental rules and regulations through the BLM and USFS to drive ranchers out of
business. Then some entity, such as Nature Conservancy, can obtain control of the ranch
and its water for pennies on the dollar. Nature Conservancy, or some other
environmental group, can then convey the valuable asset to the hands of government or the
government's creditors, at a handsome markup.
This attack is impacting virtually every farmer and rancher in the state. SB 76 will be an
extension of this ongoing effort to take control of Nevada water resources and convey them
to outside entities where their full profit potential can be exploited.
The Nevada Supreme Court did not rule that the state engineer must issue water rights to
the BLM. It only stated that the state engineer must allow the BLM to file on
unappropriated waters, if any of those exist. SB 76 opens the door for the BLM and USFS to
extort water rights from private individuals and/or drive them out of business in the
process. The valuable water resource then eventually finds its way into the hands of one
of the water monopolies; like Suez. In the meantime, if some property owners wake up
and bring a "taking" and compensation action against the federal government for
the value of their property, SB 76 has shifted liability from the feds to the state of
Nevada. Nevada taxpayers would then pay the bill.
The solution: obviously SB 76 needs to be recognized for what it is, and deep-sixed into
oblivion before it can accomplish the mischief it will bring about. The best
solution though, is for the individual water right
holder to make sure their title to water rights and fee land is perfected. Remember, the
Nevada Supreme Court only said BLM could apply for unappropriated water on public lands.
The U.S. Supreme Court has
clearly stated: "It is well settled that lands to which any right or claim of another
attaches is not public land". Grazing allotments are not public lands and the
water rights on them are not unappropriated.
Nevada water law created these rights and has protected them well for almost 140 years.
Let's not tamper with success. Leave the amending of Nevada water law alone,
but make sure we use Nevada water law properly.
[ Back to News/Alerts ] [ Home ]