Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Water Rights topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Committee pauses work on water‑rights transfer bill after dash‑10 amendment posted
Summary
Senate Bill 1153 — which would add new review protections for transfers that reduce in‑stream habitat and provide tribal consultation authority — was taken off today’s agenda after a dash‑10 amendment was posted; committee members asked for time to review technical changes limiting the standard to native migratory salmonids.
The Senate Committee on Rules opened a work session June 5 on Senate Bill 1153, which would restrict approval of water‑right transfer applications that reduce in‑stream habitat for protected aquatic species or otherwise impair water quality in certain streams.
Leslie (Legislative Counsel) summarized the bill’s earlier dash‑6 amendment as prohibiting transfers that would cause loss of in‑stream habitat for native migratory fish (salmonids) and clarifying the standard applies when a proposed change moves a point of appropriation closer to a stream reach. The amendment removed an exemption for transfers necessary to address imminent public health or safety risks and established a uniform contested‑case process and conditions for tribal consultation.
After Legislative Council presented a subsequently posted dash‑10 amendment, committee members paused the work session to allow time for review. Dexter Johnson of Legislative Council described the dash‑10 change as narrowing the ecological standard from "listed species, threatened, endangered and sensitive" to a geographic test tied to presence of native migratory salmonids (members of the salmonid family). He said the substitution applies throughout the bill. Water Resources Department Director Ivan Gahl (for the record) explained the 1909 prior‑appropriation framework and confirmed that water rights established before 1909 can be subject to transfer review when an application for transfer is filed.
Multiple senators commented on the timing and number of late amendments; several members requested more time for stakeholders and legislators to review the dash‑10 language. Jeff Huntington, senior natural‑resources advisor to the governor, characterized the dash‑10 edit as replacing water‑quality and listed‑species tests with a single presence‑based test and noted a technical amendment related to municipal exemptions and basin planning rules. Chair Jared Jama said the committee would not move the bill that day and planned additional work sessions to allow thorough review.
No formal action was taken; committee staff were asked to post the amendment and provide members time to review.
