Oregon’s groundwater is being used faster than it’s being replenished, and the state’s aquifers are declining. The Oregon Water Resources Department is proposing new rules in response. The agency would change the way it decides if groundwater will be available for new users.
Justin Iverson is the groundwater section manager for OWRD. He joins us to explain what we know about Oregon’s groundwater and what can be done to regulate its use.
Note: This transcript was computer generated and edited by a volunteer.
Dave Miller: This is Think Out Loud on OPB. I’m Dave Miller. Oregon’s groundwater is being used faster than it’s being replenished. That’s according to the state agency that is in charge of regulating water. It is unsustainable and it’s having real world effects. More than 1,200 wells have gone dry in less than three years. The Oregon Water Resources Department is proposing new rules in response. The agency wants to change the way they decide if groundwater will be available for new users going forward. Public comment has opened through the end of this month. Justin Iverson is a groundwater section manager for the Oregon Water Resources Department and he joins us now. It’s good to have you on Think Out Loud.
Justin Iverson: Yeah. Thank you very much.
Miller: What is the plan in terms of the effort to change the way granting of new groundwater rights would work? How does it work now and what would change?
Iverson: Right now, the rules are written such that water is available for a new groundwater appropriation if it’s not over appropriated. So essentially that has us allocating right up to the point of topping off the system, if you will. Then we’re in a position where we need to address over appropriation at the same time that we stop adding to the issues. The proposed new rules take a tact that’s twofold, which is really related to how groundwater exists in the state, which is as a piece of, I’ll say dynamic storage under the ground. But also, it’s a flowing part of the hydrologic cycle that feeds our streams and rivers and makes up, in many cases, a sizable component of stream flow.
So the new rules are twofold. First of all, they define the term, reasonably stable water levels, which is a term in statute that hasn’t been defined to date and therefore hasn’t been very functional. And secondly, it addresses groundwater that serves as tributary to and sustaining surface water flows, and adds a assessment of that surface water availability to ensure that the tributary groundwater is available and isn’t already allocated or spoken for in the water rights system.
Miller: What does “reasonably stable” mean? What would it mean?
Iverson: Well, the rules as they’re proposed right now have a quantitative and a rate and total drop in that definition. So we expect water levels to rise and fall to some degree over several times scales. Annually, we have a wet winter, generally, and a dry summer. And water levels respond by being relatively high at the end of the winter and relatively low at the end of the summer. And we want to account for that, but we also want to catch as early and as confidently as possible when use has exceeded that recharge. The definition right now that’s proposed is a year-on-year rate of decline, no more than half a foot a year, and also a limit to total decline of spring high water levels of 25 ft.
Miller: Do you have a good enough understanding of these aquifers to be able to make those decisions?
Iverson: For the most part, yes. We have a good deal of information about water levels from across the state. In general, we’ve got some amount of information in most aquifers, such that if a new application came in and we assess that application on a case by case basis, we’ll have some data nearby to base our decision on. And in the case where we might not, the rules define a minimum set of information that we are committing to being available. And if that information isn’t available, then we will not make a positive finding of availability until that information is collected.
Miller: Do you have an estimate for how many fewer new water rights applications would have been granted over the last, say, decade or so, if these new rules had been in place? I’m just curious how big an impact this would have had if it had already been the rule of the state?
Iverson: Boy, I really don’t have a good estimate. I will say that it’s likely to be significant. We are, for example, currently concerned or have a rule, a set of considerations for groundwater rights that would have a short-term and acute, I would say, impact to surface water, but there’s limits on the distance and timing and magnitude of impact. The new rules really strip away those criteria that allow for current applications that would have impact over a relatively long period of time or cumulative impacts over time. And they really focus on the health and availability of the tributary surface water source. In Oregon, many, not all, but many streams are fed by groundwater, so these new rules will affect a good chunk of the state where groundwater is tributary to surface water.
Miller: But as I mentioned at the beginning, your agency itself has pointed out that we’re on an unsustainable path. 1,200 Oregon wells went dry in the last three years. Unless I’m misunderstanding something, it seems like this new rule would at best prevent aquifers from being depleted at a faster rate, but I don’t see how they were going to reverse this trend.
Iverson: Yeah, that’s largely correct. The rules that are currently pending affect potential new future groundwater rights. They don’t affect existing water rights or rights that are exempt from the permitting process by statute. So really, these rules are aimed at not making the problem worse, rather than addressing any particular issue.
I do want to emphasize, this is laid over the top of what has been a multiyear drought that we’re starting to come out of now and certainly some of the dry wells that have happened are directly related to permitted groundwater pumping. But, there’s many reasons that wells might go dry and there are other compounding issues as well, so I just want to be clear about that.
Miller: Justin Iverson, thanks very much.
Iverson: Yeah, sure thing. Thank you.
Miller: Justin Iverson is the groundwater section manager for the Oregon Water Resources Department. I should note that there are going to be two more public hearings about these proposed groundwater rights rules changes. There’s going to be one in Central Point on May 16th and one in Salem on May 21st.
Contact “Think Out Loud®”
If you’d like to comment on any of the topics in this show or suggest a topic of your own, please get in touch with us on Facebook, send an email to thinkoutloud@opb.org, or you can leave a voicemail for us at 503-293-1983. The call-in phone number during the noon hour is 888-665-5865.