Nevada Supreme Court and the Pipeline to Vegas

Wow. A Nevada Supreme Court decision has thrown a big wrench in plans for a $3.5 billion, 300 mile pipeline to carry groundwater to Las Vegas.

An AP article in the Las Vegas Sun sums up the results of Great Basin Water Network vs. State Engineer:

The Nevada Supreme Court on Thursday dealt a big set back to Southern Nevada Water Authority's claims to thousands of acre-feet of rural water near the Nevada-Utah line, saying the state engineer waited too long to act on dozens of water rights applications filed two decades ago.

...and goes on to say...

In an unanimous ruling, justices said Nevada law required the state engineer to act on SNWA's 1989 water rights applications within a year. Instead, they weren't considered until 16 years later, after many people who initially filed protests had either died or moved away.

Some people who later moved into affected areas were unaware of the applications, and others, like conservation groups, were later denied standing by the state engineer to participate in hearings.

The Court found that the due process rights had been violated in the case of 54 people and organizations who protested the water rights that would flow through the pipeline. This means the water rights must either be reapplied for altogether, or the protest period must be reopened.

An article in today's Salt Lake Tribune reports on the Nevada Supreme Court's decision and what it means for a pending water deal between Nevada and Utah. As a result of the decision, the controversial deal seems to be on hold (the proposed pipeline would carry water from aquifers in eastern Nevada which scientists say are connected to Utah's Snake Valley), according to statements in the article:

The ruling prompted Utah officials to stand down on a pending Snake Valley water-sharing agreement with neighboring Nevada. A recent Salt Lake Tribune poll of Utah voters shows across-the-board opposition to that plan.

"Based on the additional requirements imposed by the Nevada Supreme Court," Gov. Gary Herbert said, "an agreement, at this time, is premature."

The Tribune article sums up the next steps:

The separate due-process matter now must go back to the lower court, which has two choices: Make the southern Nevada utility reapply for water rights or reopen the protest period.

Either choice would mean Utah counties, environmental groups, west desert ranchers, wildlife advocates, scientists and residents, heretofore shut out, could have a say in the proceedings.

Of course, this doesn't mean the issue is settled -- it means more process, more legal wrangling, and more time. But more process and more time aren't always bad things, and in this case they could be downright good things.

Read more about the decision in the blogging world:

• Emily Green's blog Chance of Rain provides probably the best summary of the case and the decision's fallout that I've come across.

• The always enlightening and entertaining WaterWired includes a link to the full decision.