Senate passes bill allowing state agencies to hold in-stream flow rights, with protections for prior water users

The Utah Senate approved Senate Bill 7 on Jan. 15, 1992, authorizing the Division of Wildlife Resources and the Division of Parks and Recreation to hold limited, nonconsumptive in‑stream flow rights to preserve fish habitat, public recreation and the natural stream environment. The bill passed on a recorded tally reported as 26 ayes, no nays, with three members absent and was placed on the second‑reading calendar.

Sponsor Scott Howell framed the legislation as a conservation measure developed through a multi‑stakeholder task force. "No 1 knows more that, the next sacred thing to your marriage is water in the state of Utah," Howell said in debate, stressing the bill balances water‑use priorities with environmental needs. He described the bill as establishing a minimum in‑stream flow and preserving agricultural priority in appropriations.

Debate centered on technical and property‑rights protections. Supporters said the bill does not create a new consumptive right and preserves existing priority rules; opponents and questioning senators pressed whether the measure would expose private users or industries (including aquaculture and hydropower operators) to unintended consequences. "If you sell a first priority right to Wildlife Resources, they can designate a reach where the water must flow," one senator warned, asking how downstream return flows and time‑share diversion practices would be protected.

Committee testimony and floor discussion emphasized safeguards: the state engineer must account for carrying and return flows so downstream users are not unjustly harmed, assessments on canal/share maintenance remain the responsibility of stockholders, and the legislature must approve any purchase funds the state might use to acquire rights. Dee Hanson, answering technical questions in the Committee of the Whole, explained that the law protects downstream users by preserving the return flow component of prior consumptive uses.

The bill also clarifies that the rights held by the divisions are for nonconsumptive uses — for example, keeping water in a natural channel to support fish — and that the state does not obtain eminent domain to appropriate private rights. Sponsors and supporters said gifts, donations or voluntary sales of water rights to the state or divisions remain permissible under current practice.

The Senate amended the bill on the floor to limit protections to uses "within the state of Utah," approved the amendment by voice vote, then voted to advance SB 7. The measure will continue through the legislative process with further committee and calendar steps.

The Senate went into brief committee and returned before moving on to other business. No implementation date was specified in the floor debate.